or C C £ JF y- £ 

v-.V' ( C. Cl e 4T cc-.fr' 

doC c C C « Cc c c 

CTo- C C C G«C Cc c fe 

y,r£ S _5£- dXVC.C 
C ( c c c ( *d cxc/e c 
dx c c: d < «c ccx p 

X f 5.5 ^ C 5 ^ C C C* <0 

; V < < C d< C Ccc <T 
c;c, c c c < <x dc c c * 
1 : d<X c d C <L, dc c c 

< c c c C c cr x x C 

' c C c. d c c dc C c 

c C< C C C C c C c c 


Core c 

c ux c c 

5 , fe <- fe 

£ 5 ' c id 

»- Cere c C ‘ 
£ d< u c c 

- Cca.c <5 

CCC d d 

Cc c c c 

c e e"d d 

c^< e. c 

C < C C 4 d • 

d c c. d C% 


m c ev 

C'c\ 

■'< •• d C 'A ' ■ V-.;. •. 

• C c . d 

d < . c 

'■ < c . < . ■■■:■■; 

£ 9 l •' c co\ 

5 ^ -"CV ec c -car. e\ ■. 

c c c <c cc 

c c c c d. (<e 

V S /CC d c<d i re 


• -d=c coo d dc e c c «r- > : -- v ^ < c 

o d c c c c d d c c' c C S S r '-' r ' c. <ep > r( 

c; c c x c < Ccc c y £ 5 c c c 4 

CCC d d «d dec d c r r ' c c 

.. c Cc .c. c: cr '<1 :d o d d ^o ^ ^ d cc red -c 

c O c d c < CC c d O d ^ i? < dL 

Cl C C d <J <Z C~ C C d d c ^ Cl' -cd C <d% 

o cc c d c c d d c d 0 ^ ' c:^._<e c Cc« 

S c c cr c: < c d d d c ^ ff < ^ cc c c 

■le d d d c d~"c?’(C 5 = C • o d cc d^ -.d <-<c< 

C C C c d d c ccc C £ * r ^ c< C cd - cc: 

r c c d r d r o c £ £ £ £ *■ c ( c < c <c free 

( d d C C d • dc cd d r o F 5^ C< r ^ f d f'C: 

, C C d C d C c , 5 c > 4 fv ^«BtCCC.C d < CC 

Id cd d d d d £('c : £ £ £ £ £ dec d dec 

LIS p V .d. C. dc r d d d d d . !■«•.■ ■tC. d CC C d" ccc 

I p £ v. r c: : ^ 

fep P < 1 v c dl: ^ r e 

I; I rerr r m c < f ei 


■ a ce c'« 

1 □ c< c < 

i d 5 < 

\ 5 ? 5 < 

ex C « 

i c c 
• 1 d cd < 

ite <a_. * 

■Id- fd: 

I tree « 

; df re,; - 

d d < 
d^ c 
3 CC c 
d < d < 
d t C • 
d r d < 

C d 

Cc . Cd 
dC Cd 
CX Cd 
re c d 

feed 

. c Cf d 

| 4 .c c C 

IS 

: c d 

? d 

C re d 

c cc c 


c c < d 
C c d d 
C c dC 
dc d c 

deed 

c c c c 

d ^ r 

ere c <r 

C c d d 

CdCId 


cc cd d d c 
Cc C d c c 
d C d C C 


1 dec: 

<■ cc 

Cc. CC 

d 

do c d 
cc cc 

dc« C d 

■d c • <: c 

ddc d 


=, d c< dc < cr< c\ :; 

^ C d Cc C- <d cd CT^ 

♦ 5' £ c < <r <d f <cc c . 

re d C< C d fed- d < 

c CC- C C ccCc c 

* *' C f c C c < 

r,t-cc d_d.CC <C ccc C < 

d c< dCd d CC d d ■< 
■Of « c . d c< c c: c< < c 

< c CC dec d c< C c 
Ozcc c o- c c -c r c; <r 

Co.CC deed deed* d‘> 

<0 c« c <■ f d c c c. -c: 


^ c C d. edx CC a X C CC C d 

^ r r ^ " ' ^€Z d.c c c. ^ -- -.^ ••— 


d? 0 -’". C 

d 4 d" 

CaO C 

.: c 

r< -c c 

a < c 

L'c< -C_d 
r < <C d 


C.c Cd deed 
dc C C ■ dC'CC c 
CC CC CX% d 
CC c d . C CCC d 

etc < c > c c .c:c' d 

ccddx C ccc. d 

o<^ c c d. 

dfd. de c d 
CCCC>d^ c d 
cerod c d 
roc %d: 4 .C c d 
Cccc ./& C fd. d 
ccec ex ec d 
cccc d c c < 

Cere d d.« C < 


ccc Cd 

elec « 

Ccc cd 

dc c < 
CCC C 
CCC cC 
ex c c 
CC c c 

Cccc 
dec c: 
de c* C 
Ccc c 
de c f 

Cc c c < 

CC< C < 

:.. dec e 


C CC ? c Jt 

£ c y <4 

C #'C .-c 

^ ccc ^ 
d cccx C 
d c c*. d 

d ce<d d 


. Cs C d 

c c c 

d C C 

c: c c 


C dec < 
d. Co c 
d Cf e 
d d c 
dCr 
d do 
. d e f r 
d c " 
d co 


cc^cc d e c *< 

®ec:' “dco <: 

dec: c dc d 
- d < C dee c 
d e c co c 

dc c d Ct C 


: ,.c x C d X r\d d c C 
* XCfc d d'cx .d <x e c 

;• If C C d c c c CXCC 

’ f <• c c ^ dee c: dec c c 
o C d dee d cere: c 
fecc c:. ccc d Ccc c 

t e< f C CC C < c < c 

t. CC. C -dec d d coe d 

CO d d de c d d C C d 

•OC C CO. c Cod C 

rceC C d CC C C C d 

■rXeC C C ^#C d c C cC 

c C d dec C C CCC C 

* <?■ C C C C d f c 4 
etc C Co c C cod • < 
ere C cr c d c/ c r- 
c c c cod d C c 

* <LO'C .d .C«;C d :X-;■ G. 


cot c <r deed 

dee C C dc t d 
CCC C . dc r d 

C < C C dc ' c 

C f < d dr C 
COX d' deed 
d t c d do c 
d o d C dc c 
d e c d deed 
dc < d_ d< d 
dc c d d c 
,d 0 c C Cc c 

dec d c c 

d CC c ;r d dec d 


T cc r c;c Ct x d d c: d 

o X c C C_c C C Coed, c 

•cC c Cd C C C d C c C. d 
cc c Cd CX f d deed C_ 

ec - c c cecd deed c 

fdc c c Cc c C dec C 

fC O. f c < A 4 C dc f d c 

fd « c d Cc r d de ed e 

♦Cd C Cd Cc x d ec c d C 
Cd O C C dco c dc C d d 

<d x cd d er e c d; ( c ; : 5: c 

cd e cd d ede cf c * de c < c 
cd «Of d c ■ CC r c - d C* C d ■ C • 

cc c e deed c d c : c c e 

d cv.fC d ’<S ec Ccc dec 
d * ■ v c d-cc c d c o < c 

d f-r ec d d • c dc c d ec 
d_ <X c c ore c CC C dc 
d, dec c e c d < C d x 

<-■ « ' d d X C d’ X C d- C 

c; c < - c c c e • c c c c d-d 

cr cc-cd d ec* c d c < d c 

d o r ; Cl, < <c f C C f < c 

CX «f v C C/ec d < c dec 

_ c <•• c d dee dp d . d/ C 

; cc oc d Cc c d c Co dc 

- dec c c c dx do c id 

cccc diC c d d-C d-e 

e < < C d c C d c c 

C c c. dcc;d, C C d 

' .oer e c C d x c d x X " d<x 

: xe f c d C c 0 d xC d f 
C: ere d CX C doj:. C dC 

cct o c d dc c C e Cr Cc 


: 'Q-. 

: >c:< 

c 

<d 

ex t d 

r< 

v . r 

m 

ft' 

c 

d- 

ccc 0 

Cf 

cf 

f 

d 

d C C 

X 

d 

’ ec 

xo 

c 

d 

• d X d 

dx 

■Cf--' 

Cr 

d 

.d c C. 

c 

ex 

■XV f 

C. 

<c 

feet C 

c 


X C Cc C e ec dec C 
c C Cc CO. re CccC 

e. Cl Cf dec xx: exe c 
W- C Cf ccc re err d 


c id X 
C idc 
c d^jC 
C. d^ 

x: d< 
, c . df 
• C C c 
CX dc 
d <0 
C • 

d <( o 

> d 0' 0<t 
■d ~ " ■ E< 
. * CX e < 

: d C ' 

X d C 


d c C odo ce C Cc ere cc Ccc C x<p 

.r , t~r, f f < r" , r .r rVi C if. ' >t 


: 4 X 


o c: C i C c C d C'O .r 

r er e . d d c d CoC 

■ X cc/ C C C'.-xg C ' Co: c c 

: d C c C dd d ' dco c 

d C C cr c d Cf c 
ecC; C-dC^ Cd C 
: ’ cef C d d< C drXt ( C 
■ ace Cdec‘coc 

d ‘ c de e d dc^c 
c c C C C C d.dc -C 
eCt < r pc % f 

etc d. C e < .d. > > 

.Cr ( C * dC C^ d CX c d 
r e C dc C d ^ d e e d, 
df c d cc c d deed 
d c d dc c d df f d 

See c . c dc c d < c c d 

CrO d Cc f C CCC <1 

dt c d deed dee d 

feed cer d d.C C d 

roe d deed d or d 
rex d deed c C c d 
tv C C OCC ' d C c C 


d cr< c c< cue o. cere, c 
C_ c C co cr.c c. . or < < > c t 

d o c ex ccc :x c c c 

C C C dc Co. C CC Cc C C 

X C.C cc 4 Cvo C ex c c c 

O C C^XC Cso X CC Cf X c 


C C C Cc- X C X.c ■ Q C <0 ■ 

C c CO x . C'f c O , X- c < 

c CC C C CO O «CC COX Cl 

c COX < 3 / c C X X cc X r 


c ceV 
dee cd 

f t e: f<<2 

< ( d/d 

C c c d 
C ex d 

c ere d 

• f Cf p 
r CC d 
C cc C 


< c<* < 

■ < (A 'c : 

f.Cx C 


C > C C O c <C 

G o c dc ccc 

«r> < C fC 0 C cr 

Gee- ex' c c cc 
<X c c. c e c C C 
< e'er. Cl <C c t.V 
C o e c er e c 
C Cr c c C C - . 

d CO C C «c . 

dee c ’X 

CcC C ' . o 

00 c X' 

CCC / ■ -or 

C stir 


X r ' 

C f 

CL r x 
CL ‘ - <f o ft 
«v < . r - 

C ;« o x 

t V - < <f.- ' : 
l cr-f 07 
■"■ .; C c cd 
CX' ! r 


> , . • i *; • V 









- -Xfc V 

3 > 

3 > 

3 > 

3> 

3> 

» 

3 > 

> 

>> 

3> 

3> 

X> 

)3 


3 ) • 
>>.3>. 


§ 3> 

£ ■■» 3 > 

> o 3) 

% 3 > 

§ » 

3>- 3 3 

>•> ->-'3> 

> > » 

.).) >)• 

3 > 3 

> 3 

|> s> 

^ J> 

? : 3 
J > 3> 

J> > T» 


_3> >i 

'3 J» > 

> ^ j» 

2> 

• 3 ) > 

> 3 £> > 

2 3> > 

' .3 > - 

3> & 

3ft. 

3 

3 3 k; 


® v 2> - 3 * 

>■* > 3 > .:» : 

Up 5 

«#■ 3 > /a*. g 

383 •> ate® 

firv- > ? 

*Ki- < >f. 9 

| » T»>H 

§&■ i ti 

Kg£ | S§ 

igaJSj 3 Ht'Slta 

3 j» 3 ’3£L 

a** > > ■?. ^> ?? 

» iv < 4 

>3 » /> J> • 3 3 ' 

3x> »• )>v. 

>l> »vo /, > V 


ST 


v -ST • -' - ' .> Jli‘> 3" 

>3 J>» w •> . . >3- 

fs3f - ! k - : > ■> ■ > >• 3 

j> *> v \ •%• . -r. 


■> .^f;? ; 

? » A> • ■, ,, ->',. , 

^ ■'>> > ■ . 3 V 
;_ 5 > . » >3’-S v -' 

> 2> -)>^ •> ^ j - 

>. 3 > ■■»/>,! ;>./- 

‘> • ■ •,• - 

:.x ; r ,. :;>,■> 3 

3 ; ' •. > > ■■ 

» '- * j, —>5 

X> ' > > . ,; ^ 

2> o 

1> V 3 g 

> 3 ^ 

^ > >> 

3 > 5S 

3 '=>, 


k - •:: .3 3' 

; > r 

J> T 

> 

/# 
3 .v 


^ >3 

js> - > > > ' 
. 3 > ■> > ' 3 ' 
3 > 33 
^ ^>3 

>> "^3 3 

3 > > : ' 3 > J. 


* ■:>£% 








s 


5f 


















































f 














« 




n 














































<2~ti*4^ JUdtxL*^ 

47th Congress, ) HOUSE OF KEPltESENTATI VES. * i Eeport 
2<Z Session. j \ No. 1827. 


\h 


1 % 


AMEEJCAN SHIPPING. 


December 15, 1882.—Referred to the Committee on Commerce and ordered to be 

printed. 


Mr. Dingley, from the Joint Select Committee on American Ship¬ 
building, submitted the following 


REPORT: 

[To accompany bill H. R. 7061.] 


^oFcoae*^ 


Of WASHES'! 


;C5*\ 


Tlve joint select committee appointed under the joint resolution of August 
7, 1882, providing — 

That a joint select committee of three Senators and six Representatives he appointed 
to inquire into the condition and wants of American ship-building and ship-owning 
interests, and to investigate the causes of the decline of the American foreign carry¬ 
ing trade, aud to suggest any remedies which may he applied by legislation, &c.— 

have attended to the duty imposed upon them , and submit the accompany¬ 
ing summary of the information obtained , and the following report: 


Your committee assembled in New York City August 11, and, for the 
purpose of furthering the investigation which they were directed to 
make in the recess, extended a public invitation to all persons possess¬ 
ing information on the subjects of inquiry to furnish the committee 
with written replies to the following interrogatories: 

First. Why cannot this country build iron, steel, or wooden vessels as well and as 
cheaply as they are built in Scotland, England, or other countries ? 

Second. If we had such vessels without cost to us, could they be ruu by us in com¬ 
petition with those of other countries who build their own vessels and run them with 
their own officers and crews, without a modification or repeal of existing laws ? 

Third. What modifications of existing laws or what new laws are required to re¬ 
move discriminations against and burdens upon our shipping and ship-owning inter¬ 
ests, such as customs dues, port dues, consular charges, pilotage, tonnage, and other 
dues, &.c. ? 

Fourth. Compare the laws of other countries with our own, with a view to their 
effect upon our and their shipping and ship-owning interests. 

Fifth. Should our navigation laws be repealed or modified; and if modified, wherein 
and for what purpose ? 

Sixth. What is the cost of the component materials of iron, steel, or wooden vessels 
in other countries and our own? 

Seventh. What would be the effect of a rebate on any or all such materials? 

Eighth. Present any other statements connected with the cause of the decline of 
the American foreign carrying trade, and what remedies can be applied by legislation. 

After taking measures to give a wide publicity to this invitation 
through the press, and to forward the interrogatories to a large number 
of persons in various parts of the Union, supposed to be practically 
acquainted with the subject, the committee adjourned to reassemble in 
New York City November 15, for the purpose of receiving oral as 
well as written statements bearing on the subjects of inquiry. During 
their six days’ session in that city the efforts of your committee to ob- 












2 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 



tain all possible information were cordially seconded by representatives 
of the associations interested in American shipping, and by gentlemen 
from various parts of the Union interested in the prosperity ot the ship¬ 
building and ship-owning industries of the United States. Lhe ex¬ 
haustive and very valuable statements and statistics accompanying 
this report bear witness not only to the cordiality with which the in¬ 
quiry has been welcomed, but also to die deep interest felt by the 
American people in the adoption of measures calculated to improve the 
condition of our foreign carrying trade. 

The official tables appended to this report furnish an accurate state¬ 
ment of the condition of the American merchant marine engaged in 
the foreign and coastwise trade and in the fisheries each fiscal year 
from 1840 to and including 1882, so far as the same is shown by the ton¬ 
nage employed in each, the value of the exports and imports which 
make up our foreign commerce, and the share of these carried in Ameri¬ 
can vessels. 

The following figures for each semi-decennial year since 1840 will pre¬ 
sent at a glance the facts relating to the past and present condition of 
American shipping : 


Years. 

Tonnage in for¬ 
eign trade. 

Tonnage in coast¬ 

wise trade. 

Value of exports 
and imports. 

Percent, carried 
in American 
vessels. 

1 Percent, carried 
in foreign ves¬ 
sels. 

1840. 

762, 838 

1,176, 694 

$231, 227, 465 

82.9 

17.1 

1845 . 

904.476 

1,223, 218 

231,901,170 

81.7 

18.3 

1850 . 

1, 439, 694 

1, 797, 825 

330, 037, 038 

72.5 

17.5 

1855 . 

2, 348. 358 

2, 543, 255 

536, 625, 366 

75.6 

14.4 

1860 . 

2, 379, 396 

2, 644, 867 

762, 288, 550 

66.5 

33.5 

1865 . 

1, 518, 350 

3, 381, 522 

604, 412, 996 

27.7 

62.3 

1870 . 

1, 448, 846 

2, 638, 247 

991, 896, 889 

35.6 

64.4 

1875 . 

1, 515, 598 

3, 219, 698 

1, 219, 434, 544 

25.8 

74.2 

1880 . 

1, 314, 402 

2, 637, 686 

1, 613, 770, 633 

17.4 

82.6 

1881. 

1, 297, 035 

2, 646, 011 

1, 675, 024, 318 

16.0 

84.0 

1882 . 

1, 259, 492 

2, 873, 638 

1, 567, 071, 700 

15.5 

84.5 


THE COASTWISE MARINE. 


The above table indicates nearly as prosperous a condition of our 
merchant marine engaged in the coastwise trade, to which only Ameri¬ 
can vessels are admitted, as is found in other domestic industries. The 
amount of tonnage, to be sure, is but little larger now than before the 
war; but as a much larger proportion of it is now composed of steamers 
than was the case twenty-five years ago, the carrying capacity is in¬ 
creased very much more than the comparison of tonnage would indicate. 
The rapid extension of our railroad system within a quarter of a century 
has also diverted to land conveyance a large proportion of the freight 
formerly carried by sailing vessels. When it is borne in mind that dur¬ 
ing the past decade the number of freight cars employed on railroads in 
the United States has increased 120 per cent., so" that to-day their 
freight capacity is nearly three times as large as that of the vessels em¬ 
ployed in our coastwise, including the lake and river, trade, the slow 
growth of the latter interest is fully accounted for. Some burdens have, 
however, been pointed out to your committee which ought to be re¬ 
moved from our coastwise marine to enable it to compete on equal con¬ 
ditions with common carriers on the land. 
























AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


THE FOREIGN TRADE. 

The foregoing official table presents a very unsatisfactory and humil¬ 
iating condition of the American merchant marine employed in the 
foreign carrying trade. While our foreign commerce has steadily in¬ 
creased, the value of our exports and imports the last fiscal year hav¬ 
ing been seven times as much as it was in 1855 and more than twice as 
much as it was in 1800, yet the share of these exports and imports car¬ 
ried in American vessels has decreased from 82.9 per cent, in 1840 to 
15.5 per cent, in 1882. Of this loss 10.4 per cent, was before the break¬ 
ing out of the civil war in 1801, 38.8 per cent, during the four years of 
the war, and 12.2 per cent, since the close of the war. The decline experi¬ 
enced between 1845 and 1850 was largely recovered between 1850 and 
1855; but from 1850 the decline was continuous, although slow, up to 
1801, when it became so rapid and serious, in consequence of the civil 
war and the operations of the Confederate cruisers, that between 1861 
and 1865 we lost more than one-third of our foreign carrying trade. 
Between 1865 and 1870 there was some improvement, mainly brought 
about by a return of vessels to the foreign trade which had been em¬ 
ployed during tile war in government service and the coastwise trade. 
Between 1870 and 1875 the share of the foreign carrying trade con¬ 
trolled by American vessels declined 9.8 per cent.; between 1875 and 
1880 the decline was 8.4 per cent.; and in the past two years it has been 
1.9 per cent. 

The growth of American tonnage engaged in the foreign trade prac¬ 
tically ceased in 1855. Before that period it had increased for many 
years at the rate of about 12 per cent, per annum; but between 1855 and 
1860, notwithstanding our exports and imports increased 8 per cent, 
per annum, or 40 per cent, during the five years, our tonnage employed 
in the foreign trade remained almost stationary, and the ship building 
industry, so far as it was directed to the construction of vessels for the 
foreign trade, rapidly declined. In 1855 our tonnage employed in the 
foreign trade was 2,348,358 tons, and in 1860 it was only 2,379,396; thus 
barely holding its own. In 1855 there were 507 vessels, of the classes 
usually employed in the foreign trade, built in the United States; in 
1856 the number declined to 463, in 1857 it declined to 309, in 1858 to 
168, and in 1859 to 117. 

During the four years of civil war the American tonnage employed in 
the foreign trade declined from 2,496,894 tons in 1861 to 1,518,350 tons 
in 1865, a loss of 978,544 tons, or nearly 40 per cent. The decline of 
this tonnage since 1865 has been about 15.5 per cent., notwithstanding 
the value of our foreign commerce has increased from $604,412,996 in 
1865 to $1,567,071,700 in 1882. 

CAUSES OF THE DECLINE. 

The decline of our foreign carrying trade dates from 1855, although 
the causes which produced it gathered volume so slowly as to attract 
little attention for several years. What these causes were appears from 
an investigation of the maritime history of the commercial world, and 
particularly of England, between 1840 and 1860. Up to 1850-’55, the 
ocean trade was carried on exclusively in wooden sailing vessels. To 
be sure, a few ocean iron steamships had been constructed between 
1836 and 1845, but the prejudice against them was so strong that it was 
not till beween 1845 and 1855 that they began to gain a secure position 
on the ocean. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


The success of irou steamships gave to England an opportunity to 
seize upon the carrying trade of the world, which she was riot slow to 
take advantage of. So long as wooden sailing vessels engrossed the 
ocean trade, the United States had the advantage in possessing cheaper 
materials for ship-building than any other maritime nation. But when 
it was discovered that iron could take the place of wood, and steam 
could be successfully substituted for sails in ocean freighting, then the 
tables were turned, because of the fact that England possessed so ex¬ 
tensive iron and coal mines in juxtaposition near the sea, with cheap 
labor to work them. 

These advantages, however, would not have availed England in the 
start if her government had not come to the aid of her shipping interests. 
By liberal mail pay, and even by guaranteeing 7 and 8 per cent, div¬ 
idends to capitalists, the English Government secured the establishment 
of steamship lines to all parts of the world. Parliament, in 1854, estab¬ 
lished a board of trade, with its president a member of the ministry, for 
the sole purpose of looking after the interests of British commerce and 
British shipping The merchant shipping laws of the United Kingdom 
were revised, so as to remove every burden from her merchant marine, 
and afford every possible facility for gaining possession of the ocean. 

It is not surprising that the great advantage given England by the 
change in the ocean carrying trade from wood to iron and sail to steam, 
so signally strengthened by the co-operation and material aid of the 
British Government, and met only by a policy of inaction on the part of 
the Government of the United States, should have begun to check the 
growth of our tonnage for several years prior to 1800. 

It is probable, however, that if the civil war had not come upon ua 
just as we began to realize that our foreign carrying trade had ceased to 
grow, while that of England was rapidly extending, some measures 
would have been taken to regain the advantages which we were begin¬ 
ning to lose. But at this crisis the civil war came upon us, and not 
only engrossed our energies and capital from 1801 to 1805, but also swept 
from the ocean more than one-third of all the deep-sea tonnage which 
we possessed at the opening of the struggle. 

Great as was the loss to our merchant marine by the direct influence 
of the war, yet more serious still was the injury it inflicted on us by the 
opportunity that it gave England to build up great iron-ship yards and 
gain possession of the channels of trade at a time when our hands were 
tied. Even after the war was closed a depreciated currency, inflated 
prices, and the high taxation necessitated to pay the expenses of the 
conflict of arms made it difficult to devise any policy to revive our ship¬ 
ping interests. To add to our difficulties, the extraordinary profits 
afforded capital and labor by the opening up of the far West made the 
more moderate profits of the foreign carrying trade undesirable for in¬ 
vestors. 

It was not till our currency had settled down to a specie basis and 
restored normal prices, and not till the far West ceased to offer so 
exceptional opportunities for investment, and the rate of interest 
dropped to the point where it has remained for a few years past, that 
any legislative measures could be devised which would be likely^ to at¬ 
tract capital to the foreign carrying trade. 

DIFFICULTIES TO OVERCOME. 

In considering what remedies for the prostrate condition of our for¬ 
eign carrying trade are within the reach of legislation, it is obvious 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


5 


that the difficulty of the problem is greatly increased by the fact that 
England has had more than a quarter of a century the start of us in 
working out her comprehensive and ingenious policy of building up her 
merchant marine employed in the foreign trade, since iron and steam 
began to revolutionize ocean transportation. However wise may be¬ 
any plan of relief and encouragement, it is obvious that the revival 
must be slow. But the stake is so great in its economical aspects, and 
so vital to our national growth and safety, that no efforts should be 
spared to accomplish the end which Congress had in view when this in¬ 
vestigation was ordered. 

The foreign carrying trade, unlike the protected coastwise trade and all 
other domestic industries, is on the great highway of the ocean, where 
competition is open to the whole world. The nation which can carry ou 
this trade the most efficiently and at the least cost to shippers will con¬ 
trol it, and in controlling it will command the ocean. By our ability 
to build vessels as cheaply as other nations, so long as wood was the 
material of which they were constructed, and by our ability to sail them 
as economically as others, so long as sailing vessels engrossed the ocean 
trade and the British Government left her merchant marine to take 
care of itself, as our government always has, the United States had a 
proud position on the ocean. We lost that position when these con¬ 
ditions passed aw r ay. If we are to revive our foreign carrying trade 
and assume the place on tbe ocean to which we are entitled, we must 
make it feasible to build the kind of vessels required for the foreign 
trade so that they will cost our ship-owners no more than they cost our 
foreign competitors; for experience shows that no nation can gain or 
permanently hold a strong position on the ocean unless it builds its 
own ships. We must also make it practicable to sail them as efficiently 
and cheaply as our rivals do. These are the problems to the solution 
of which the investigations of your committee have been directed. 

CONSTRUCTION OF VESSELS. 

If wooden sailing vessels controlled the ocean trade, as they did 
tw T enty-five years ago, there would be no problem of the construction 
of vessels to solve. We can build to-day first-class wooden sailing ves¬ 
sels as cheaply as they can be built elsewhere, as we did before the war. 
But, notwithstanding such vessels will always be used extensively in 
the coastwise trade, and to a restricted extent in the foreigu trade, yet 
it is obvious that iron steamships are to largely control the ocean carry¬ 
ing trade of the world. Year by year, as improvements have been made 
to economize fuel, steamships have engrossed more and more the ocean 
traffic, until to-day they command the trade of the North Atlantic. 

All of the practical gentlemen who appeared before your committee 
agreed that it now costs on the average from $10 to $15 per ton more 
to build an iron sailing vessel, and from $25 to $35 per ton more to 
build an iron steamship in the United States than it costs on the 
Clyde. They all agreed that the chief cause of this excess of cost is 
the fact that"the labor required to mine, smelt, and make the iron, and 
fashion it into the form of a steamship, costs considerably more in the 
United States than it does on the Clyde. If we had been called upon 
to build iron steamships before the war, we should have found the 
same difficulty in competing with Great Britain in a manufacture 
requiring so large an amount of labor as does the building of iron 
steamers from the ore and coal in the bed. Among other causes named 
was the fact that the small demand for iron vessels, for the reason that 


6 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


England’s experience, start, and other advantages enable lier to build 
and sail vessels more cheaply than we can, gives little encouragement 
to investments of the large amount of capital needed to establish and 
extend iron ship yafds, stimulate the inventive genius of our people, 
and overcome the obstacles always encountered in inaugurating new 
industries. 

THE REMEDY RECOMMENDED. 

No remedy can be effective or wise which does not look to the devel¬ 
opment of iron-ship building in the United States, and to making it 
practicable to build iron vessels in this country for the foreign trade at 
a cost to the owners no greater than that of similar ships of our rivals. 
Every remedy suggested is urged largely on the ground that it will 
ultimately accomplish this result. Nothing is better settled than the 
fact that no nation can gain or long hold a strong position on the ocean 
unless it builds its own ships. Any nation which relies on another na¬ 
tion for its supply of ships loses in time of peace its commercial inde¬ 
pendence, and in time of war places its very existence at the mercy of the 
powers which command the ocean. 

In endeavoring to devise a policy which will build up the iron-ship 
building industry in the United States, and supply our ship-owners 
with such vessels as they may want for the foreign trade, at a cost no 
greater than the cost of vessels run by their competitors, your commit¬ 
tee have found more or less difference of opinion among ourselves as to 
what would be the wisest and most efficient plan. Feeling the grave 
importance of an earnest effort to provide a remedy for the decadence 
of the American carrying trade, and recognizing that there must be 
some yielding of personal views if anything is to be done, your com¬ 
mittee, without waiving the individual right of any member to favor ad 
ditional remedies, have united in recommending the adoption by Con¬ 
gress of the following plan: 

When any vessel, whether steam or sail, shall be constructed and equipped in the 
United States for the foreign trade, including the trade between the Atlantic and the 
Pacific ports of the United States, in whole or in part of materials of the production 
of the United States, the owner or owners of such vessel shall be entitled to receive 
and collect from the United States a drawback or sum equal in amount to the duty 
which would have been collected upon imported materials of like description and of 
equal quality with the American materials used in the construction, equipment, en¬ 
gines, boilers, and other appurtenances of such steam or sail vessel: Provided , That in 
ascertaining such drawback the duties on such iron or steel materials shall be com¬ 
puted on iron and steel advanced in manufacture not beyond the point of plates, angles, 
bars, and rods: And provided further , Ti at this section shall apply only to vessels com¬ 
menced after the passage of this act. 

For the purpose of illustratiug wliat would be the practical working 
of the foregoing plan, we have obtained from the Delaware River Iron, 
Ship Building and Engine Works a schedule of the materials actually 
used in constructing two first-class passenger and freight iron steam¬ 
ships for the Pacific trade, of 2,131 tons each, having a speed of 1& 
knots. It appears that 3,709,845 pounds of iron, mainly in the form of 
plates, angles, and bars, were used in the construction of the hull, en¬ 
gines, boilers, &c., of each steamship. The duty on this iroD, if im¬ 
ported in these forms, would average under the present tariff abouf one 
and a half cents per pound, or about $20 for each ton of the steamship. 
The duty on other materials used in the hull, equipment, and furniture 
of the steamship would carry up the drawback allowed from the Treas¬ 
ury to about $34. As the cost of each of the steamships to which we 
have referred was $280,317, or $134 per ton, the net cost to the original 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


7 


owner of a similar steamship, under the foregoing plan, after deduct¬ 
ing the “ drawback,” would be about $100 per ton, which, from all the 
information obtained by your committee, would be substantially the 
cost of a similar steamship built on the Clyde. 

If the steamship were intended only for freighting, with the speed of 
seven or eight knots, usually found in English freighting steamers, the 
quantity of iron used, and consequent^ the “drawback” and cost, 
would be considerably reduced. In the case of iron sailiug vessels only 
about five-eighths of the iron used in a first-class steamship for hull, 
engines, &c., is required for a given tonnage, and the “drawback” 
would be about $15 per ton. 

The proposed “drawback,” therefore, will practically offset the in¬ 
creased cost of building an iron steamship in the United States over 
its cost on the Clyde. This is the unanimous judgment of ship-builders 
and shix>-owners, so far as your committee have heard from. This is the 
judgment also of the Board of Trade of San Francisco, which proposed 
this plan, the Maritime Association of New York, and other commercial 
boards and gentlemen. So far as the original cost of any kind of a ves¬ 
sel affects the question of the restoration of the American flag to its 
proper position on the ocean, there is good reason to believe that the 
policy proposed will solve the problem. 

It should be borne in mind, however, that the United States Treasury 
receives annually about a million and a half dollars from the tax on ton¬ 
nage engaged in the foreign trade. This tax is not imposed on vessels 
engaged in the coastwise trade, or on any other industry. In 1880 this 
tax yielded $1,490,544, of which $1,252,687 was paid by foreign, and 
only $237,863 by American vessels. The tax collected from this source 
the last fiscal year was a little less, but it is certain to increase as our 
foreign commerce enlarges. There would be a general concurrence in the 
justice of abolishing the tax were it not for the fact that England and most 
foreign nations impose a similar tonnage tax on all vessels entering their 
ports, and the further fact that five-sixths of our tonnage tax is paid by 
foreign, and only one-sixth by American vessels; and on account of recip¬ 
rocal commercial treaties, the tax cannot be abolished as to our own ves¬ 
sels without also working abolition as to foreign vessels. We can, how¬ 
ever, and should use this tax or its equivalent to encourage our own 
merchant marine engaged in the foreign trade. This was precisely what 
England did when she granted $10,000,000 out of her tonnage tax to 
make the Clyde the seat of the most favorable location in the world for 
iron ship building. 

On the reasonable supposition that the tonnage tax will amount to 
$10,000,000 during the next five years, this alone would meet the draw¬ 
back demand under the plan proposed for at least 400,000 tons of new 
steamhips and sailing vessels for the foreign trade during that period. 
This increase of tonnage would of itself go far to revive our foreign car¬ 
rying trade, without taking a single dollar from the ordinary revenue. 
If the addition to our tonnage should be more than this, the additional 
appropriations required would be wisely expended. 

From any point of view the experiment is one which affords much 
promise 5 and in view of the general indorsement which it has received 
from boards of trade and commercial men, and the national importance 
of the end sought to be reached, ought to be given a thorough trial. 

If, in addition to this direct aid, the United States shall imitate Eng¬ 
land in giving contracts to private ship yards to build a portion of any 
steel war steamships which it may be deemed wise to construct for our 
Navy, there is reason to hope that favorable results would follow. 


8 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


DRAWBACK ON MATERIALS OF A VESSEL FOR FOREIGN ACCOUNT. 

As it is essential for our iron and steel ship-yards to place themselves 
in a position to secure contracts for building vessels for South America, 
and perhaps other foreign countries, your committee recommend that a 
drawback of 90 per cent, be allowed on any imported materials of a 
vessel constructed in the United States for foreign account. The iaw 
as it now stands (section 3019, Revised Statutes) allows such a drawback 
in the case of a vessel or other article constructed wholly of imported 
materials. As many of the materials of such a vessel can be obtained 
at home as cheaply as abroad, and would be preferred by the builder 
of a vessel for foreign account, it is wise to allow a drawback so far as 
imported materials are concerned, when the vessel is built partly of 
foreign and partly of domestic materials. 

THE RUNNING OF VESSELS. 

The other problem which must be satisfactorily solved relates to the 
successful running of American vessels in the foreign trade after they 
are built. After a policy has bten inaugurated which will secure to 
Americans sail and steam vessels, at no higher cost than those owned 
by our rivals, such a consummation will not revive the carrying-trade 
of the United States unless we can maintain and sail these vessels 
under our laws at no higher cost to the owners than English ship-owners 
can sail their vessels under British laws. 

That we have not been able to do this for many years is evident from 
the fact that notwithstanding we have built first-class wooden sailing 
vessels for nearly ten years as cheaply as our foreign competitors, yet 
we have been gradually driven from the ocean by foreign sailing ves¬ 
sels as well as by foreign steamships. More than half of our exports 
and imports are still carried by sailing vessels, and yet American ves¬ 
sels carry but little more than a third of this half. To be sure it is only 
in this branch of the carrying trade that we make any showing; but the 
slow and steady decline of even our sailing tonnage employed in the 
foreign trade, and the unanimous voice of our ship-owners, bear witness 
to the disadvantages under which we have labored. 

. LEGISLATIVE OBSTRUCTIONS. 

The evidence presented to your committee shows that a large part of 
the obstacles to the successful running of American vessels in competi¬ 
tion with English ships may be overcome by modifying our shipping 
laws, removing burdens, and giving the same privileges as to ships’ 
supplies and the same compensation as to mail service as the English 
laws have given for a quarter of a century. 

Up to 1854 the English laws relating to shipping were substantially 
the same as ours. At that time the English Parliament began a com¬ 
plete revision of her merchant-shipping statutes, so as to remove every 
obstacle and give every facility to British shipping. From year to year, 
as the board of trade has recommended, England has been legislating 
in the interest of her merchant marine. During this whole period noth¬ 
ing has been done by the American Congress to meet England in this 
direction. Our merchant-shipping laws remain substantially the same 
as they were originally framed more than fourscore years ago. They 
were all that were needed so long as the English laws were the same. 
Our error was in not imitating England in so modifying our laws as to 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


give the American merchant marine the same advantages in this respect 
that English shipping was given under English laws. And our further 
error was that when steamships began to take the place of sailing ves¬ 
sels on the great lines of commerce, we did not also imitate England in 
extending the same encouragement for the establishment of American 
steamship lines that she did for the establishment of English lines. 

Although the adoption of such a policy, after England has intrenched 
herself in her position on the ocean for a quarter of a century, would not 
speedily secure for us the benefits which it would have brought if it 
had been inaugurated before the war, yet your committee believe that 
it would gradually work most beneficent results. At least it would re¬ 
move all legislative obstructions to the revival of our foreign carrying 
trade, and would leave American enterprise and capital free to enter 
into competition for a due share of ocean transportation under the same 
legislative conditions as our rivals. Your committee, therefore, unani¬ 
mously recommend a modification of our laws relating to American 
merchant marine employed in the foreign trade, in the following partic¬ 
ulars : 

THREE MONTHS’ EXTRA WAGES. 

Under old laws, enacted at a time when the sailors of our merchant 
marine were all Americans, and uot, as now, 90 per cent, foreigners; 
when shipping agreements were for the round voyage, and not, as now, 
generally, from port to port, and when the means of communication 
abroad with the ports of the United States were infrequent and dila¬ 
tory, an American vessel from which a seaman is discharged by a United 
States consul is practically required to pay such seaman three months’ 
extra wages, two-thirds of which go to the seaman and one-third to 
the government. The facts brought to the attention of your com¬ 
mittee by a large number of ship-owners, masters and others, made it 
clear that what was formerly a wise law, rarely appealed to by any 
sailor, has now, in the changed condition of our foreign trade, become a 
serious burden on American vessels, and a positive injury to the morale 
of the crews. The burden to our merchant marine, engaged in the for¬ 
eign trade, consists not simply in the large amount of money exacted 
from it, but also, and more injuriously, in the annoying delays and con¬ 
tentions arising from hearings before consuls and consular officers. 
Your committee recommend that the law be so modified as to provide 
that the vessel shall pay one month’s extra wages or provide adequate 
employment on a returning vessel, or provide a passage home to a sea¬ 
man discharged from an American vessel in a foreign port only when 
the discharge is on account of extreme cruelty of treatment, when the 
vessel is found designedly improperly provided, w 7 hen the vessel is sold 
in a foreign port, when the voyage is willfully and unnecessarily con¬ 
tinued by the master beyond the port to which the seaman shipped, and 
when a seaman is injured in the line of duty or contracts disease in 
consequence of want of proper provisions on ship-board—in the last case 
the vessel to be responsible for the payment of all the expenses of sick¬ 
ness and medical attendance. 

When a seaman is discharged by the United States consul in the 
port which he expressly contracted should be the end of his service, 
there seems to be no reason why the consular officer should exact three 
months’ extra wages from the vessel under any pretext. When a sea¬ 
man is discharged by the consul, on the application of the former, there 
seems to be no just ground for requiring the vessel to pay extra wages 
for any other causes than those heretofore named. In no case ought 


10 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


the consul to have power to exact extra wages or charges from a vessel 
except for a cause specifically set forth by law. To give every consular 
officer—many of them foreigners—authority to impose such a charge 
upon a vessel whenever a discharge is granted to a seaman , 11 in accordance 
with the general principles or usages of maritime law,” as arbitrarily con¬ 
strued by such official, without the right of appeal, as section 4580 of the 
Revised Statutes of the United States now does, is to put an improper 
power into the hands of men who may have an interest in the decision, 
and many of whom, in the smaller and more remote ports, are unfitted 
to exercise so broad a discretion. No other government imposes such 
a burden on its merchant marine, and the imposition of it on ours works 
in practice a serious discrimination against American vessels. In re¬ 
porting amendments of our laws in this direction, your committee have 
followed the English law which does justice to the vessel, and at the 
same time amply protects the seaman. 

TRANSPORTATION OF DISABLED SAILORS. 

The law (section 4578 R. S.) as it now stands compels every Ameri¬ 
can vessel to convey wrecked, disabled, or destitute American sailors 
from a foreign port to the United States on request of a United States 
consul, and allows not exceeding $10 each for this service. This may 
be sufficient for the care, transportation, and rations of a disabled sailor 
on a voyage of a few days, but in a long voyage imposes a serious loss 
on the vessel. Your committee recommend an amendment of this law, 
authorizing the collector of the port in the United States where the 
seaman is landed, to pay additional compensation, not to exceed 50 
cents per day, in cases where the length of the voyage requires. 

ADVANCE WAGES. 

Your committee further recommend a prohibition of the payment of 
advance wages, or giving advance notes on the shipment of seamen. 
As is well known, these advance wages almost uniformly go to the sailor’s 
landlord, who is thus enabled to strip the seaman, not only of the wages 
already earned and paid, but also of the wages which he is yet to earn. 
Worse still, it is the fund from which the u blood-money” system and 
other evils come, that are a shame to civilization. A report made to the 
House of Representatives by the Committee on Commerce, at the first 
session of the Forty-seventh Congress, presents the necessity of this 
legislation so clearly that we need not pursue the subject further. 

OFFICERS OF AMERICAN VESSELS. 

The law (sec. 4131 R. S.) requires that not only the master or captain, 
but also all other officers of an American vessel, shall under all circum¬ 
stances be citizens of the United States. This is wise as to the mas¬ 
ter. But it has been represented to your committee that cases frequently 
arise in which one of the mates dies or is disabled, when it is necessary 
to supply his place with an experienced foreign seaman. Your commit¬ 
tee are of opinion that no useful end is advanced by a requirement 
which fetters an American vessel in the foreign trade, and therefore 
recommend the modification of the law so as to apply only to captains 
and masters. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


11 


LIABILITY OF SHIP-OWNERS. 

Under existing law, the liability of a part owner of a vessel is that 
of a partner, and therefore unlimited. The English law limits the 
liability of a part owner of a vessel to the proportion of any and all 
debts and liabilities that his individual share of the vessel bears to the 
whole, on the ground that as the business of a vessel must necessarily 
be committed to an agent removed from his principals, as in a corpora¬ 
tion, it is just that the part owner should be regarded as a shareholder 
rather than a partner. As it appears to your committe that our law 
bears too heavily on the part owner of a vessel, and discourages invest¬ 
ments in vessel property, your committee recommend the adoption of 
substantially the English principle of limited liability. 

HOSPITAL TAX. 

The excellent Marine Hospital Service in the United States is sup¬ 
ported by a tax of 40 cents per month on each seaman in both the for¬ 
eign and coastwise marine (sec. 4585, ft. S.), which is paid by the vessel 
and deducted from the seamen’s wages. Before 1871 this tax was 20 
cents per month. As the indirect effect of this tax is to give English 
vessels, which are not required to pay a hospital tax, an advantage in 
hiring seamen, if it does not increase the wages of seamen on Amer¬ 
ican vessels, your committee recommend the reduction of the tax to the 
former limit of 20 cents. 

TONNAGE TAX ON VESSELS TRADING WITH CANADA. 

Your committee recommend the abolition of the tonnage tax as to> 
vessels engaged in the trade with the Dominion of Canada. The law 
now practically exempts from this tax a large portion of the vessels 
engaged in this trade on the lakes; and inasmuch as the trade is in the 
nature of a coastwise trade, and carried on in direct competition with 
railroads, justice seems to require that the exemption be made general 
so far as the trade with Canada is concerned. 

CONSULAR FEES. 

Under our laws consular officers are paid from the fund derived from 
fees exacted from American ships and merchants in foreign ports. In¬ 
deed, in 1882 not only was our consular service, costing $889,840, paid 
from these fees, but also $51,018 surplus was left in the Treasury for 
application to other government expenses. About $100,000 of these 
fees came from American shipping. In the same period England appro¬ 
priated over $1,000,000 from her treasury for the support of her consular 
service, which is maintained in every part of the world, mainly to extend 
British commerce and aid British shipping. The charges imposed by 
the British consular offices on English vessels are very small. 

Your committee think it would be wise to abolish all fees for services 
to American vessels and sailors, even if this involves a slight charge on 
the Treasury for the maintenance of our consular system. For the pres¬ 
ent, and until a system of paying all consular officers by salaries can be 
arranged, if thought proper, such officers, when paid in whole or in part 
by fees, may be required to make a detailed report to the State Depart¬ 
ment of services performed to American vessels and sailors, with the 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


T2 • 

fees heretofore allowed for such services, and be allowed from the Teras- 
ury the same amount which they would have received under the fee 
system. 

REBATE ON SHIPS’ SUPPLIES. 

Our laws authorize the importation in bond, free of duty, of all ma¬ 
terials needed for the repair of vessels engaged in the foreign carrying 
trade, but they make no provision for a similar rebate of duty on ships’ 
supplies of vessels engaged in such foreign trade, as do the English 
laws. 

Your committee recommend an amendment of section 2514, so as to 
cover ships’ supplies as well as materials for repairs. 

TRANSPORTATION OF MAILS. 

The law as it exists (Sec. 3976, E. S.) compels the master of every 
American vessel engaged in the foreign trade to carry such United 
States mails as may be tendered him by the Post-Office Department, 
and allows him as compensation for such service a sum not exceeding 
two cents per letter carried. In no case is this an adequate compensa¬ 
tion, and in some instances it does not pay the cost to the vessel of 
delivering the mails at the post-office in the port of arrival. The pay 
to United States vessels in the foreign trade, for transporting the mails 
in 1880, was only two and a half cents per mile, while at the same time 
the steamers on our coast, which contracted to carry the mails, re¬ 
ceived 57J cents per mile for mail service. The contrast between 
our inadequate mail pay to American vessels engaged in the for¬ 
eign trade, and the very liberal mail pay given by Great Britain to her 
steamship lines, only serves to show more clearly the injustice and un¬ 
wisdom of our policy. Since 1840 England has paid more than $250,- 
000,000 for mail service with the deliberate purpose of establishing and 
maintaining steamship lines to connect the United Kingdom with all 
parts of the world. Even in the last year she paid about $3,000,000 to 
her steamship lines for mail service, which was $1,641,300 more than 
she received from mail matter transported by them. 

As this matter is before the postal committees of both the Senate and 
the House, we refrain from reporting any legislation, but unanimously 
recommend such a modification of our laws as will give fair compensa¬ 
tion to American vessels in the foreign trade which may carry our 
mails, and adequate pay for mail service to American steamship lines 
that are already or may be hereafter established. 

TAXATION OF VESSELS BY STATE AUTHORITY. 

There is no one thing which has had more to do in rendering it diffi¬ 
cult to sail an American vessel in competition with an English steam¬ 
ship than the different systems of taxation of shipping, as well as other 
invested capital, in the two countries. The English system of taxation 
is on incomes; ours on the value of the property. For example, a steam¬ 
ship valued at $500,000, and earning 8 per cent, net or $40,000 annually, 
would pay in England an income tax of about 2 per cent., or only $800. 
A similar steamship, under the laws of every State but Massachusetts 
and New York (which have recently exempted from local taxation ves¬ 
sels engaged in the foreign trade) and possibly Pennsylvania, would pay 
a tax of about 2 per cent, on the value, or $10,000. Thus, in the single 
item of taxation the steamship under the English flag would have every 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


1 $ 


year an advantage of $9,200, which, in so close a business as the foreign 
carrying trade, would of itself be enough to make it impossible to sail 
an American steamship in competition with an English rival. 

Your committee are unanimously of opinion that it is of vital impor¬ 
tance to the revival of the [American foreign carrying trade that this, 
difficulty should be removed either by State or Federal action. Already 
the legislatures of two, if not three, States have removed the difficulty 
so far as they are concerned by exempting fromitaxation vessels em¬ 
ployed in the foreign trade. 

Your committee think that the element of local taxation enters so^ 
largely into the solution of the problem of sailing American vessels, that 
it is incumbent on Congress to exercise the power of regulating com¬ 
merce, which it possesses under the Constitution, to the extent of pro¬ 
hibiting State and municipal taxation of vessels engaged in the foreign 
trade. 

DUREAU OF COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION. 

The English merchant marine and English commerce have been 
greatly aided by the watchful supervision and regulations of the Brit¬ 
ish board of trade, whose president is a member of the cabinet. In 
the executive department of our government we have no board or bu¬ 
reau with similar duties and powers, and none .which is required by 
law to even keep a watchful eye over the interests of our shipping, ex¬ 
cept for purposes of collecting the revenue. Whether it would not be 
wise to establish in the Treasury Department a bureau or board of com¬ 
merce and navigation, of which the Secretary of the Treasury should 
be the official head, with powers and duties in some respects akin to 
those of the British board of trade, is already under consideration by the 
Committees on Commerce of the Senate and House, and will undoubtedly 
receive the attention it deserves. 

CONCLUSION. 

It is unnecessary for your committee to dwell on the great impor¬ 
tance of any and all legislative measures that will tend to a revival of 
the American foreign carrying trade and a restoration of the American 
flag to a position on the ocean commensurate with our population, 
wealth, and rank in the family of nations. The problem presented to 
Congress involves interests of exceptional importance. The great agri¬ 
cultural interests of the West and South are especially concerned. To¬ 
day at least 85 per cent, of their products exported to other countries 
depend on foreign vessels, mainly English, for transportation, and un¬ 
less something is speedily done to relieve American shipping engaged 
in the foreign trade, soon our dependence on English ocean steamers 
will be complete. This places our commerce at the mercy of England. 
In case of war between that country and another power able to put 
cruisers on the ocean, American farmers and the American people as a 
whole would suffer nearly as much as the belligerents by having their 
exports and imports in British bottoms liable to capture and confisca¬ 
tion. In its material aspects the shipping problem is national and in 
no sense local. 

It is more than a business question. It is one which affects our rank 
and influence as a nation. A nation is known and felt outside of its 
own boundaries more by the flag which floats at the mast-head ot its 
merchant marine than by anything else, It is difficult to conceive the 
loss which we suffer, not only in national prestige, but also in commer- 


14 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


cial importance, by tbe infrequency with which American vessels appear 
in foreign ports. 

The problem concerns our national independence and safety. In 
modern times the seat of power of every nation is on the rocking waves 
as well as on the solid land. The naval power of every country will in 
the long run be proportionate to its merchant marine. In building up 
our foreign carrying trade, therefore, we strengthen the defenses of the 
nation and give new security to our Republic. 

While some of the members of your committee do not concur in all 
the statements and reasonings of the foregoing report, and would recom¬ 
mend additional legislation, yet all concur in recommending the passage 
of the accompanying bill. 

O. D. CONGER, Chairman . 

WARNER MILLER. 

G. G. VEST. 

H. F. PAGE. 

J. W. CANDLER. 

GEO. M. ROBESON. 

NELSON DINGLEY, Jr. 

ROBERT M. McLANE. 

S. S. COX. 


Mr. S. S. Cox, from the Joint Select Committee on American Ship¬ 
building, submitted the following as the 

VIEWS OF THE MINORITY: 

It is not difficult, from evidence readily available, to determine the 
causes of the remarkable decay and present prostrate condition of the 
ocean commercial marine of the United States. It is not easy, however, 
to point out what measures in the way of legislation are likely to prove 
remedial for its resuscitation and future prosperity. 

Ship-building and ship-using are branches of industry to which the 
people of the United States living on its Atlantic seaboard may be said 
to have taken to naturally. Fora long period the shipping interests of 
the country were second only to agriculture in national importance. 
Through various vicissitudes the progress of these industries was, on 
the whole, rapid and continuous. Their degree of development and 
prosperity culminated in 1855. This year marks the inception of a period 
of decay and retrogression. This condition has continued uninterrupt¬ 
edly ever since. It had exhibited itself in the falling off after this year 
in the construction of new tonnage and in the diminished sales of Amer¬ 
ican tonnage (once a most important business) to foreigners. It did not 
exercise, however, any marked effect on the ocean carrying trade of the 
United States until alter the outbreak of the war in 1861. The cause of 
this decay and retrogression was the substitution of iron for wood as a 
material for ship construction, and of steam for sails as a method for 
ship propulsion. Great Britain rapidly pushed forward, and applied 
these improvements. The United States, although the attention of the 
public was repeatedly called to the situation by persons interested in 
shipping at different times between 1850 and 1860, was less progressive. 
As a consequence, the commercial marine of Great Britain commenced 
to gain, while that of the United States commenced to decay. 

The exhibit “A r annexed will show the tonnage of vessels built since 
the war. It is not a flattering exhibit. 

CAUSES OF DECAY. 

One reason why the United States was less progressive was an excess 
of confidence. This was engendered by a long course of prosperity in 
the ability of wooden sailing ships to continue to compete successfully 
for the ocean carrying trade in the then future. Another and more 
potent reason for the course taken was the obstructions created by the 
navigation laws of the United States. These laws did not permit our 
citizens to exercise freely their judgment as to what ships they might 
use in the prosecution of their then profitable and extended ocean com 
merce, or as to the manner in which they could supply them.. Such 
then, in brief, is the true statement of the inception and primary cause 
of the decline of the American commercial ocean marine. 

The war, which commenced in 1861, was not in any sense the cause 
of the commercial phenomena under consideration. It accelerated the 
course of events which, if the circumstances existing from 1855 to 1861 


16 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


had Continued, would have been inevitable even had there been no war. 

Decay having commenced, other causes have come up and have proved 
powerfully operative to accelerate it and prevent the recuperation of 
our shipping interests. They are in the main the provisions of our navi¬ 
gation laws. These prevent American merchants and seamen from buy¬ 
ing any ships for their use other than those of American construction; 
the re-enactment during the war period of onerous tonnage taxes; vex¬ 
atious consular fees and regulations; hospital taxes; unnecessary inter¬ 
ference with the wages and shipments of seamen; heavy state or local 
taxes from which the vessels of our chief foreign competitors are wholly 
exempt; and the great enhancement in cost, by reason of customs and 
internal taxes, of all materials and stores necessary for the construction 
and use of vessels. These obstructive laws, regulations, and taxes, Fed¬ 
eral and State, are peculiar to the United States. They do not form a 
part of the fiscal policies or commercial codes of any of the leading com¬ 
mercial and ship-using nations of the world. So long as they form a 
part of the conditions under which American citizens are constrained 
to use ships as instrumentalities of commerce, the shipping interests of 
the United States cannot prosper. 

It would, however, be a great mistake to infer (as many that have given 
testimony before the joint committee seem to infer) that if all these 
enumerated obstructions and burdens upon the instrumentalities of so 
much of the cornu erce of the United States as pertains to the ocean 
were removed, we should, at no distant day, be again a great ship¬ 
building and ship-using nation. Such a result is impossible. If all 
these obstructions were removed and if ships of the most improved 
pattern and modern construction and fully equipped were given to us 
and placed as free gifts at our wharves, it is doubtful if our ocean 
commerce and shipping would be materially revived and developed. 

One reason of a general nature against such revival is the preoccu¬ 
pation of our people in other more attractive and remunerative employ¬ 
ments. It is not likely that any great increase or revival of our ship¬ 
building and shipping interests will take place until we have reached 
the maximum of production in other lines of labor and enterprise, 
especially in agriculture. When that point is reached, and our energies 
are diverted to other pursuits, the ocean may have its olden attraction 
and remuneration for our people. 

Another more practical and tangible reason is this: All trade and 
commerce is essentially barter, product being given for product and 
service for service. In order to sell we must buy, and in order to buy 
we must sell; and he who will not buy cannot sell, and he who will not 
sell cannot buy. Again, ships have been truly called the children, not 
the parents, of commerce. 

The necessity and opportunity for the use of any instrumentality must 
exist, before the instrumentality can be needed or profitably employed. 
The soil must exist and be ready for the plow r , or the plow will be a use¬ 
less implement. There must be a trade and commerce or a free inter¬ 
change of commodities between the United States and other trans¬ 
oceanic countries, or there will be no occasion for ships or opportunity 
to profitably employ them. Now, for many years the policy Qf the 
United States has been to impose taxes and frame laws with the avow ed 
purpose of restricting so much of the commerce of the country as is 
carried on in ships upon the ocean. What has been the result % It has 
been so eminently successful that the American commercial marine has 
been nearly annihilated. The once great and profitable carrying trade 
on the high seas which the nation once controlled no longer exists. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


17 


RESTRICTIONS ON SHIPS AND TRADE. 

This in short is the whole story. In detail the situation and the in¬ 
fluences that have mainly led to and created it are thus graphically told 
in a recent publication, Our Merchant Marine, by David A. Wells: 

In addition to a national policy which has seemingly been framed and maintained 
with a view of discouraging and preventing the ownership and use of ships, for the 
purpose of ocean trade and transport by citizens of the United States, there is a large 
and most influential class of persons in the United States who do not want ships—do 
not believe in their utility or in the trade and commerce of which they are the necessary 
adjuncts and instrumentalities; and though restrained through fear of public opinion 
in a great degree from working openly, yet never fail, while professing to the con¬ 
trary, to do all in their power to make the resuscitation of American shipping im¬ 
possible. And thus far their efforts have been eminently successful. 

Such an extraordinary statement requires, one would think, con¬ 
firmation. The proof is given in the utterances of Henry C. Carey. 
This advocate of protection argued that our interests, moral and mate¬ 
rial, would be enhanced if the Atlantic were an impassable ocean of 
fire. Another protectionist, quite potential in his day, Horace Greeley, 
would have prevented ocean ships of transport. These teachings smack 
of barbarism, but they are taught in such text-books as u Thompson’s 
Social Science and National Economy.” Trade and commerce are no 
better in the eyes of such economists than “ war and piracy.” 

This school do not believe in ships or their revival. They sustain 
laws which forbid practically Americans from barter with the rest of 
the world. They favor restrictions on commerce, and disfavor recip¬ 
rocal exchange of products. 

BARTER, TARIFF, AND TRADE. 

In proof of this, observe the European steamship service with South 
America. It comprises British, French, German, and Italian lines. It 
has 104 steamers. A Boston firm endeavored to enter this trade. It 
bought its ships on the Clyde. Their registry was British. They were 
under British command. Two years wound them up as failures. The 
trouble was not the outgoing cargoes. They had no incoming car¬ 
goes. To make ship-owning profitable, to Chili for instance, our pro¬ 
ducts, cotton fabrics, machinery, hardware, grain, which Chili demands 
and uses, must not only pay freight going out, but the commodities of 
Chili, mostly copper, copper-ores, and wool, must pay freight on coming 
into our ports. But since our tariff on copper is prohibitory, and on 
wool nearly so, there was no return cargo from Chili. The steamers 
were obliged to take Liverpool freight, and transship it in bond at Bos¬ 
ton. This was unprofitable. The result is thus described by one of 
this firm, as follows: 

A radical reform of our whole tariff system and policy is therefore the one great 
essential for the restoration of our shipping and our ocean-carrying trade. We have 
got to recognize the fact that it is our present absurd protective policy that has made 
ft impossible to maintain our status as a commercial nation upon the ocean.. We have 
got to recognize the fact that the present pressing necessity of the United States is 
extended markets for the continually-increasing surplus of our products—mechan¬ 
ical, mining, and fishing, as well as agriculture; that for obtaining such markets ships 
controlled by and employed in exclusively American interests are essential instru¬ 
mentalities; but that such markets will not and cannot be obtained, or a national 
commercial marine find a basis for growth or even existence so long as we restrict by 
law the producers of this country from freely exchanging the products of their labor 
with the products of the labors of the producers of other countries. 

The copper product of Chili now nearly all goes fco England, where it is manufac¬ 
tured and distributed all over the world. There is no doubt in our minds that the 

H. Rep. 1827-2 



18 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


United States would by this time have possessed nearly all this copper trade had it 
not been for the duty imposed about fifteen years ago, which has had the effect to 
enormously enrich a few copper producers at Lake Superior at the expense of the 
rest of the country, which consumes their production, or rather a part ot it only, as 
they now export about one-quarter of the production and sell it at 5 cents less per 
pound than consumers here have to pay for the same copper. 

We have no doubt that the reduction of the duty on copper to a figure that would 
still allow the Lake Superior mines a fair profit would so increase our trade with 
Chili as to permit a profitable business for steamers, and we should pay for all the 
copper imported with our manufactures of cotton, iron, wood, &c. 

As farther illustrating how the present tariff policy cripples the use 
of ships and shuts us out from the ocean trade in a way that a repeal of 
navigation, local and hospital tax, and other similar laws cannot remedy, 
let us further trace, with Mr. Wells, the incidents of this Chilian copper 
business. It is full of meaning, as illustrative of the whole system. 

Chili now exports about $17,500,000 of copper and copper pro¬ 
ducts. It nearly all goes in British ships, which, loaded in the first 
instance with the merchandise which Chili wants— i. e. 7 cotton goods 
(average $55,000,000 per annum), hardware, paints, paper, machinery, 
guns, &c.—sail for Valparaiso, earning an outward freight; arriving 
in Chili, the cargo unloaded is replaced with another cargo of copper 
ores or wool and the ships return to England earning homeward freights. 
Profitable employment is thus given to many British ships, and an ex¬ 
planation in great part afforded of the continued supremacy of the British 
commercial marine, which strengthens and increases just in proportion 
as trade increases. Arriving in England, the copper ores are sold to 
the copper-smelters at Swansea, in the southeast of England, who in 
converting them into mercantile forms employ English labor, English 
capital, English railway service, and consume large quantities of English 
coal. Smelted into ingots, rolled into sheets or converted into yellow-metal 
or brass, the Chilian copper is finally sold to whoever in the world wants 
to buy—and all the world always does want to buy copper under some con¬ 
ditions—and out of the proceeds of the sale the Swansea smelter pays 
himself, pays the cotton spinner, the ship-owner, the coal miner, the com¬ 
mon carrier, and all others concerned, the movement as a whole being in 
the nature of a great circle of transactions, in every one of which some 
profit accrues to English capital, and some opportunity is afforded to 
English labor. But in this great and special circle of production and 
exchange American capital and labor find no place. 

“To cap the climax of this curious chapter of our commercial policy,” 
says Mr. Wells, “ consider now how the American ship builder and ship¬ 
owner supplies himself with copper. English yellow metal, made in part 
out of copper produced in the United States, and sold at a less price than 
the American producer will sell to the American consumer, is admitted 
free of duty if used on American vessels not engaged in the coastwise 
trade; while copper and copper ore, out of which the same yellow metal 
could be made, is not allowed to be brought into the country by reason 
of the excessive duty imposed on its importation. Could there be any¬ 
thing in legislation more supremely foolish and ridiculous ? 

“Something of an approximative measurement of the extent of this 
Chilian business—which is only a fraction of the total South American 
trade which we have declined to participate in, or rather, which Ve will 
not allow our merchants and ships to attempt to participate in, may be 
obtained from the fact that, out of an entrance and clearance into Val¬ 
paraiso in 1877 of 827 steamships and 1,319 sailing vessels, representing 
a total of 1,447,368 tons, theUnited States was represented by sixty-eight 
sailing vessels only.” 


AMERICAN SHIPPING 


19 


TARIFF ON SHIP-BUILDING. 

The tariff operates as well to discourage shipping and commerce as to 
prohibit ship building in iron and steel. The burden of the evidence 
is: That we can now build wooden ships, and of superior quality, in this 
country as cheaply as they are built abroad. .But as to the building of 
iron and steel ships, the cost of materials and labor abroad is such that 
the percentage is largely against us, and if we could build, it is doubtful 
if our people would buy them, since it will not pay to run, under pres¬ 
ent laws and conditions. The tariff* on the component parts of a ship 
are collected in Exhibit B, to which reference is hereby made. 

The conclusions to which, as the result of our investigations, the under¬ 
signed have come, are as follows: 

An examination of all the evidence bearing on the situation makes it 
evident that no one measure will arrest the decay of American ship¬ 
ping, bring back prosperity to our ocean carrying trade, or revive the 
industry of ship building in this country. If the Congressional Repre- 
sentatives of the interior or inland States think that they have no 
special interest in this subject, the following extract from the recent 
address of the president of the New York Produce Exchange is com¬ 
mended to their consideration: “The difference in the cost of a single 
penny in laying down grain at Liverpool may determine the question 
whether millions of bushels shall be supplied by this country or shall 
be drawn from the ample fields of Hungary or Southern Russia.” 

The facts make it further evident that— 

First. We must repeal our navigation laws, at least to the extent of 
permitting our navigators and merchants to supply themselves with 
ships on conditions as favorable as are enjoyed by their competitors— 
who are the merchants and sailors of all other maritime nations. 

The first matter which confronts us when we would defend the navi¬ 
gation laws is the indisputable fact that under these laws our ship¬ 
yards have run to grass, our ocean trade dwindled to next to nothing, 
and our American sailors are hardly five in a hundred upon the ships 
that are left. Every object of the navigation laws which was to protect 
and enliven American ship-building and shipping interests is frustrated 
by the laws themselves and their associate in restriction and prohibition— 
the tariff. What worse can be effected by their repeal than exists? If 
we could only buy, we might begin as Germany did—to repair; and re¬ 
pairing there has led to building, and building to the employment of 
labor and the use of capital. The evidence of this is seen at various 
places upon German waters. Stettin and its enterprise is an illustration 
of this result. Germany has increased her tonnage in twenty years 
from 16(1,000 to 950,000 tons. The iron-screw steamers have been her 
favorite. She bought them in open market. She could buy cheaper 
than she could build; but repairing and building came along. 

Let us first use, and then we will have cause to repair, and then build. 
Then the native inventive faculty of America will be rearoused, and 
something will be the result, and that something cannot but be better 
than our present forlorn condition. 

Second. If we are to build ships in the United States in competition 
with other nations—and unless we can do so the ships we may build will 
never be voluntarily bought or used by our own citizens or any others— 
our ship builders must have their materials for construction as cheap 
as the builders with whom they are to compete. Either allow the im¬ 
portation free of duty of all the material and stores that enter into the 
construction and equipment of ships, or reduce the tariff. So long as 
the business of constructing iron steamships has to bear the burden 


20 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


high prices consequent on protective duties averaging 40 per cent., not 
to speak of the prohibitive navigation laws; it cannot compete with like 
industries in free-trade countries. There is no possibility of evading this 
conclusion. It will be seen by the report that oui committee, in dealing 
with the desperate straits of our shipping interests, do recommend as 
the heroic remedy, a quasi drawback on articles for domestic and foreign 
account, which enter into the making of ships. 

LOCAL TAXATION. 

Third. If foreign competing maritime nations do not subject their 
ships to local taxation, the United States evidently cannot afford to 
do so. If Congress, under the power given it by the Constitution to 
regulate commerce, has the power, it should exempt, as instrumentali¬ 
ties of commerce, all vessels engaged in foregin or inter-State commerce 
from every form of local, State or municipal taxation. Concede to the 
States the right to tax the instrumentalities of inter-State or foreign 
commerce in any degree, and you concede to the States the right to say 
that there shall be no inter-State or foreign commerce, for the right to im¬ 
pose 1 per cent, of taxation involves the right to impose 100 per cent., 
or, in other words, the right to destroy. 

In the case of Weston v. The State of Missouri, the Supreme Court 
made use of the following language: 

Commerce is a term of tlie largest import. It comprehends intercourse for the pur¬ 
pose of trade in any and all its forms, including the transportation, purchase, sale, 
and exchange of commodities between the citizens of one country and the citizens and 
subjects of other countries, and between the citizens of different States. The power 
to regulate it embraces all the instruments by which such commerce may be con¬ 
ducted. 

In a recent case, decided at the October term, 1881, of the Supreme 
Court of the United States, wherein the Western Union Telegraph Com¬ 
pany sued the State of Texas, Chief-Justice Waite—for the court— 
held that the State tax on telegraphic messages within the State boun¬ 
daries was valid; outside of the State, not valid. When u private mes¬ 
sages were sent out of the State, it is a regulation of foreign and inter¬ 
state commerce, and beyond the power of the State.” Many cases were 
cited as authority. The conclusion was thus stated by the learned Chief- 
Justice: “The rule that the regulation of commerce, which is confined 
exclusively within the jurisdiction and territory of a State, does not 
affect other nations or States, or the Indian tribes; that is to say, 
the purely internal commerce of a State belongs exclusively to the 
State, is as well settled as that the regulation of commerce, which does 
affect other nations or States or the Indian tribes, belongs to Congress. 
Any tax, therefore, which the State may put on messages sent by pri¬ 
vate parties, and not by the agents of the Government of the United 
States, from one place to another, exclusively within its own jurisdic¬ 
tion, will not be repugnant to the Constitution of the United States.” 

The Supreme Court therefore have decided the question unequivocally 
that foreign and inter-State commerce are under the taxing control of 
the Federal Government. Therefore, the full committee, confident of 
this Federal power over commerce, do not hesitate to present a section 
of a general nature, which overides all State and local taxation. 

Fourth. Beduce all the expenses, taxes, and other burdens on sliip- 
ping. 

MEASURES OF RELIEF. 

There can be no objection to the proposed changes of the laws re¬ 
lating to the payment of extra wages to seamen. When a vessel is 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


21 


sold, or tlie voyage improperly continued beyond tlie port to which 
the sailor shipped; when the vessel is found to be insufficiently pro¬ 
visioned, and when the master refuses to correct the same; when by 
reason of injury to the seamen in the line of duty, or of disease con¬ 
tracted because of want of proper food on shipboard, is it proper to 
hold the ship responsible for the expenses incidental to the sickness"? 
The amendments of the Revised Statutes as to transportation of dis¬ 
abled sailors; as to the remission of consul fees; as to the importa¬ 
tion in bond, free of duty, of ship supplies for vessels in the foreign 
trade; as to the reduction of the Marine Hospital tax on seamen from 
40 to 20 cents; as to the limitation of the part owner of a vessel, pro¬ 
portionate to his share; and in case of death and disability by one of 
the mates of a vessel on a foreign voyage, of the employment of a for¬ 
eign seaman—these are proper reforms, and in the interest of shipping 
revival. The tonnage tax of 30 cents is grievous and might well be abol¬ 
ished altogether, if it were not for certain treaty regulations, and that 
it does not fall very heavily upon our American ships. The amount last 
year was $1,490,544, of which only $257,863 was collected from our own 
vessels. This tax might be so lessened and regulated as to the number 
of voyages, that but a small amount would fail upon our own tonnage, 
without lessening much the tax collected on foreign shipping. The 
committee, however, have limited their repeal to the Canada trade, 
which is mostly in our hands. 

The committee have also agreed to present a measure for the repeal 
all provisions of law which would in any way sanction “blood” money 
or money paid out of the sailor’s wages in advance. We would eradicate 
this evil; and by its eradication would take one of the worst .of the 
practices which are complained of by those interested in shipping. 

Fifth. There is no reason why we should not add to this catalogue 
the repeal of the United States shipping act of 1872 (Title 53, R. S.). 
It is a heavy tax on shipping. For its repeal there is a general senti¬ 
ment in the testimony. 

The committee, however, have only gone so far on this topic as to al¬ 
low the ship master to select his own crew where he elects to do so; 
and this will relieve the shipping interest, in the opinion of the com¬ 
mittee, of a great and crying evil. 

Under this law our consuls are authorized to act as shipping commis¬ 
sioners in foreign ports, and to exact a fee of $2 for shipping each sea¬ 
man. In addition to this, consuls exact their consular fee for certifying 
such shipment. The expense of procuring each seaman is thus $3, and 
$2 in addition for the agent who procures the seaman, making in all $5. 
Under the British law the cost is equivalent to 2 shillings, or 46 cents. 

If, however, the decline of American shipping continues much longer 
these reforms will be unnecessary, for there will be no sailors hired or 
discharged and no necessity of invoking or discarding the co-operation 
of consuls, for there will be no ships of ours engaged in foreign trade. 

Most of these reforms are copied from recent English statutes. Eng¬ 
land eradicated most, if not all, of her onerous navigation laws, and 
she has prospered marvelously. Our committee copies her example in 
nearly every respect, except in the two most vital and significant points, 
viz, free materials and free ships. 

Sixth. Reform the taritf, and the natural resources of our country and 
the intelligence of our people are such that with the reduction of the 
burden of taxes and prices consequent on low rates of duty we shall re¬ 
gain in the next twenty years more than we have lost in the last twenty 
and become the first maritime nation of the world. 


22 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


Seventh. Without resorting to the artificial and unequal expedient 
of subsidies and bounties, let Congress assimilate in their treatment 
steamships and railroads to the extent of paying steamships, for car¬ 
rying the mails of the United States good compensation—as good as 
the government now pays railways for performing similar service. 

OUR MARINE DEGRADATION. 


In conclusion, it is certain that the prominent feature of this country 
is, or was before bad counsels ruled, our marine. The breezes are still 
ours. The waters are ours. The coast is still ours. Lumber and 
timber we have. Iron we have in abundance. Steel, by the refine¬ 
ment of science and the Bessemer process, has been cheapened, and 
would be still cheaper were not protection its fatality. Our shipping 
and our commerce in our early days were our profit at home, our pride 
abroad. Now what are they? The percentages of exports and imports 
carried in the vessels of the United States from 1855 to 1882 demon¬ 
strate. They are as follows: 


1856 . 

1857 . 
1859 . 
1861 . 
1863 . 
1865 . 
1867 . 


Per cent. 
... 75.2 
... 70.5 
... 66.9 
... 65.2 
... 41.4 
... 37.7 
... 33.9 


1870 . 

1872 . 

1874 . 

1878 . 

1879 . 

1880 . 
1881 . 


Per cent. 
... 35.6 
... 28.5 
... 26.7 
... 25.9 
... 22.6 
... 17 . 6 
... 16.2 


American vessels transported during the fiscal year 1881, 16.2 per 
cent., foreign vessels 83.8 per cent. These figures show more than use¬ 
less rhetoric, the degradation of this once proud and profitable em¬ 
ployment. 

Whatever may be the cause of this decay, the main obstacle to its 
resuscitation, and without the removal of which all other legislation is 
futile, is the obstruction to commerce by the tariff. This adds its forty- 
odd per cent, to the other obstructions which the committee propose 
to remove by the bills ordered to be reported. 

While the committee are generally agreed upon the measures proposed, 
the minority are constrained to notice the fact that the most vital and 
prominent relief, by the freedom of materials for ships from custom 
dues, and the right to purchase ships abroad, is utterly ignored in the 
majority report. In the opinion of the minority, nothing could be more 
futile, not to say absurd, than to deal with a vital disease by remedies 
which only affect the superficial ailments whose removal would leave 
the patient in as dangerous a plight as ever. 

When we reform our whole tariff system and extend our markets for 
our continually increasing surplus, we may revive the means by which 
we ourselves may exchange the products of this country with those of 
other countries, and thus not only save the $140,000,000 paid to for¬ 
eigners in freightage and fares, but gradually resuscitate that art, the 
very apprenticeship to which is almost obsolete. 

CONCLUSION. 

f 

The decadence of our shipping and its causes are all too familiar to 
the public mind. The selfishness which prevents its resuscitation are 
no less familiar. It is an old, old story. The minority of the com¬ 
mittee would repeat it in detail were it not known to every tyro in com¬ 
merce and economy. They would rehearse it if, by studying the causes 
of the decay, we could remove the effects. The simple truth is, the 
















AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


23 


removal ot the causes ot decay will uot revive shipping'. Our shipping 
interests have been choked by other interests—choked to death. Re¬ 
strictions cumber our statutes. In a country so abundant in pro¬ 
duction as ours, which seeks every market, and is unlimited in its range 
of enterprise, the capital policy is: mare liberum. Give us a free sea, 
and freedom to trade upon its bosom ; permit us to buy in the best 
market the materials to fashion vessels of the best quality, and to buy 
the completed ship where our competitors buy their vessels, and even 
without the opportunity which foreign wars ma}^ give to our carrying 
trade, and with the aroused inventive faculty of America consequent 
upon our freedom to use our energy and skill, and with the natural 
laws and their conditions to aid intelligence and interchange, and we 
may once more find the capital, labor, and genius of our countrymen 
cvole from the sea, as they have from the land, its most valued treas¬ 
ures. Our merchant marine languishes for lack of liberty. Its revival 
must come from the enlargement of our freedom. 

The minority of the joint select committee, while concurring with the 
report as to the measure reported by the committee, desire also to pre¬ 
sent two other propositions: 

First. For the admission free of duty of all the materials finished and 
perfected and ready to put together in a ship 5 and, 

Second. For the free admission to American registry of ships built 
abroad. 

These amendments are hereto appended, marked Exhibits O and D. 

(Signed) GEORGE G. VEST. 

ROBERT M. McLAXE. 

S. S. COX. 


Exhibit A .—Tonnage of iron sailing and steam vessels halt in the United States from 1868 

to 1880, inclusive. 


1868 

1869 

1870 

1871 

1872 

1873 

1874 

1875 

1876 

1877 

1878 

1879 

1880 


Tear ended June 30— 

Sailing 

vessels. 

Steam 

vessels. 

Total. 


Tons. 

Tons. 

2, 801 
3, 545 
7, 602 
13,412 
12, 766 
26, 548 
33, 097 
21, 632 

21, 346 
5, 927 

26, 960 

22, 008 
25, 538 

Tons. 

2, 801 
4,584 
8,281 
15, 479 
12, 766 
26, 548 
33, 097 
21, 632 

21, 346 
5,927 

26, 960 

22, 008 
25, 582 


1, 039 
679 

2, 067 


. 

















44 



Exhibit B .—Taxes on some of the principal materials used in steamship manufacture under 

the existing tariff. 


Per cent, ad valorem. 


Wrought iron for ships and steam-engines, 2 cents per pound. 18 

Cables and cable chains, 2| cents per pound. 56 

Anchors and parts of anchors, 2£ cents per pound.56 

Boiler and other plate iron, $25 per ton.69 

Nails and spikes, 1| cents per pound. 37 

Cast-iron steam pipes, 1£ cents per pound. 47 

Rolled or hammered iron, 1£ cents per pound.54 

Screws, for wood, 8 to 11 cents per pound.50 

Sheet-iron, 1{ to 3 cents per pound. 51 

Copper sheathing, 3 cents per pound.26 

Wire rope, strand or chain, 2 cents per pound and 15 per cent. 57 

Wrought rivets and bolts, 2£ cents per pound. 44 

Wrought steam and water tubes, 3| cents per pound. 67 



































24 


AMERICAN SHIPPING. 


Steel in forms not otherwise specified. 

Tarred cable and cordage, 3 cents per pound. 

Manila (untarred) cable, 2£ cents per pound. 

Other descriptions, untarred, cents per pound. 

Sail duck, or canvas for sails. 

Tar and pitch..- 

Plank, deals, and other sawed lumber of hemlock, $lper 1,000 feet. 
Timber for spars. 


30 

26 

26 

24 

30 

20 

20 


Add to these burdens the tariff on the American flag of 77 to 132 per 
cent., and to that the taxes State and local, and you will see what a 
load the shipping interests are weighted under. 


Exhibit C. 


AMENDMENT AS TO FREE MATERIALS. 

That section 2513 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be amended so as to 
read as follows, viz: Section 2513. All or any part of the materials, whether wood, 
steel or iron, copper, yellow metal, bolts, spikes, sheathing, trenails, canvas for sails, 
whether flax or cotton; rigging and cordage, whether hemp, manila-hemp or iron 
wire; anchors and cables, iron plates, castings and forgings, angle irons, beams, 
masts, yards, rivets, bolts, nuts, screws, engines, boiler plates and tubes, and ma¬ 
chinery, and all other materials and appliances which may be necessary for the con¬ 
struction and equipment in whole or in part of vessels, whether steam or sail vessels, 
to be built and furnished in the United States after the first day of January, eighteen 
hundred and eighty-three, may be imported in bond under such regulations as the 
Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe; and upon proof that such materials have 
been used for such purpose, no duties shall be collected or paid thereon. 


Exhibit D. 

AMENDMENT FOR FREE SHIPS. 

From and after the first day of January, eighteen hundred and eighty-three, any 
citizen or citizens of the United States may purchase the whole of any steam or sail 
vessel, no matter where said vessel may have been built, whether within the United 
States or in a foreign country, or whether said vessel may have been owned in whole 
or in part by an alien or aliens; and said vessel shall be registered free of duty as to 
her hull, spars, appliances, outfit, and equipment (including boilers, engines, and ma¬ 
chinery, if a steam vessel) as a vessel of the United States, by the collector in any 
port of entry of the United States to whom application for such registry may be made 
by said citizen or citizens, in the same manner as though said vessel had been built 
in the United States. 










APPENDIX. 


STATEMENTS AND VIEWS 


OF 

CERTAIN SHIP-BUILDERS AND SHIP-OWNERS OF THE COUNTRY 


REGARDING 

THECA USES OF THE DECLINE OF THE AMERICAN FOR¬ 
EIGN CARRYING TRADE, 

SUBMITTED BEFORE THE JOINT SELECT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE 
TO INQUIRE INTO THE CONDITION AND WANTS OF AMERICAN SHIP¬ 
BUILDING AND SHIP-OWNING INTERESTS. 


New York City, August 11, 1882. 

The Joint Select Committee of Congress, consisting of Senators Miller, Conger, and 
Vest, and Representatives Page, Candler, Robeson, Dingley, McLane, and S. S. Cox 
to inquire into the wants of American ship-building and ship-owning interests, under 
the following joint resolution, held its first meeting in New York City August 11,1882: 

JOINT RESOLUTION providing for a joint select committee to inquire into the condition and wants 
of American ship-building and ship-owning interests. 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in 
Congress assembled , That a joint select committee of three Senators and Six Repre¬ 
sentatives be appointed to inquire into the condition and wants of American ship¬ 
building and ship-owning interests, and to investigate the causes of the decline of the 
American foreign carrying trade, and to suggest any remedies which may be applied 
by legislation. Said committee shall have authority to sit during the recess, and 
shall submit their report at the opeuing of the second session of the Forty-seventh 
Congress. The actual expenses of such committee, including compensation of a clerk, 
shall be paid out of the contingent funds of the Senate and House of Representatives. 

At that meeting Representatives Page, McLane, and Cox were the only members 
present. 

Mr. Page, of California, chairman of the House committee, was made temporary 
chairman, and Mr. Cox, of New York, secretary. 

The result of the meeting was the preparation of a series of questions to be for¬ 
warded to the prominent representatives of American shipping interests, asking their 
attention and response thereto. 

The following is a copy of the queries submitted: 

“ First. Why cannot this country build iron, steel, or wooden vessels as well and as 
cheaply as they are built in Scotland, England, or other countries? 

“ Second. If we had such vessels without cost to us, could they be run by us in com¬ 
petition with those of other countries who build their own vessels and run them with 
their own officers and crews, without a modification or repeal of existing laws? 

“ Third. What modifications of existing laws or what new laws are required to re¬ 
move discriminations against and burdens upon our shipping and ship-owning in¬ 
terests, such as customs dues, port dues, consular charges, pilotage, tonnage, and other 
dues, &c. ? 

“ Fourth. Compare the laws of other countries with our own with a view to their 
effect upon our and their shipping and ship-owning interests. 

“ Fifth. Should our navigation laws be repealed or modified, and if modified, wherein 
and for what purpose ? 

“ Sixth. What is the cost of the component materials of iron, steel, or wooden vessels 
in other countries and our own ? 

“Seventh. What would be the effect of a rebate on any or all such materials ? 

067-1 





2 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


“Eighth. Present any other statements connected with the cause of the decline of 
the American foreign carrying trade, and what remedies can be applied by legisla¬ 
tion. 

The committee adjourned to meet in New York Wednesday, November 15, 1882. 


Fifth Avenue Hotel, New York City, 

November 15, 1882. 

The second meeting of the committee was held at the Fifth Avenue Hotel, New 
York, Wednesday, November 15, 1882. Present, Messrs. Conger, Vest, Cox, Dingley, 
and Candler. Senator Conger was chosen chairman, and Congressman Cox acted as 
secretary. 

Mr. Charles F. Elwell, of the Maritime Association of New York, invited the com¬ 
mittee to hold its meetings at the room of the Produce Exchange. The committee 
thanked Mr. Elwell kindly for his courtesy, but concluded to hold sessions at their 
parlors in the Fifth Avenue Hotel. 

The committee then at 12.30 o’clock p. m. adjourned. 


Fifth Avenue Hotel, New York City, 

November 16, 1882. 

The committee met at 10.30 a. m. Present, Messrs. Conger (chairman), Vest, Cand¬ 
ler, Dingley, Robeson, and Cox. 

Mr. F. W. Houghton, secretary of the Maritime Association of the Port of New York, 
presented an address of welcome, and the following memorial in behalf of the Mari¬ 
time Association: 

MEMORIAL OF THE MARITIME ASSOCIATION OF THE PORT OF NEW 

YORK TO THE JOINT COMMITTEE OF CONGRESS ON LEGISLATION FOR 

SHIPPING. 

Gentlemen : The Maritime Association of the Port of New York, embracing in 
its membership 1,000 business firms, almost wholly builders, owners, managers, or 
consignees of ships or cargo, or otherwise connected with the ocean-carrying trade, 
respectfully presents its views upon the subject of the legislation needed for the re¬ 
vival of the American mercantile marine. 

As statesmen, the first consideration in your minds is, of course, the benefit of the 
whole country, without regard to section, and without distinction of class or interest. 

In this view two reasons present themselves why our commerce should be restored : 

1. It is evident that this important factor in national prosperity cannot be crippled 
without injuriously affecting the interests of the whole country. The $100,000,000 
or more annually paid for ocean freight, passenger, and mail transportation, &c., in¬ 
stead of going into circulation here and stimulating our agriculture and manufact¬ 
ures, is so much drained from our resources and diverted to foreign coffers. To that 
extent it is not only a loss to the merchant on the seaboard, but to the manufacturer, 
and to the producers of the West and South, as well as to those from whom they draw 
their supplies. 

2. The maintenance of a mercantile marine is essential to national safety as a naval 
reserve. Ship-yards with skilled labor and with the necessary machinery and appli¬ 
ances could not be readily improvised in case of war, nor could the educated officers 
and seamen necessary to man a navy. 

In this matter promptitude is necessary. The management of merchant ships is an 
educated talent, which is being gradually lost as American ship-owners are forced 
from the field. Therefore, in the neglect of our mercantile shipping, the govern¬ 
ment is not only losing an important element of security, but is preventing its res¬ 
toration. 

In proceeding now to give our views as to the nature of the legislation necessary 
for the revival of American shipping, it should be understood at the outset that there 
are certain questions of free ships, on the one hand, and subsidies or “protection” 
on the other, which, however important, we, as an association, leave untouched, for 
the reason that they are questions of policy upon which there is an irreconcilable 
difference of opinion. The members are therefore left free to express their views in¬ 
dividually thereon. 




AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


3 


The points following, however, are the sentiment, either unanimous or nearly so, of 
the entire number engaged in the shipping business, not only on the Atlantic sea¬ 
board, but on the Gulf and on the Pacific. 

We therefore ask— 

!• The repeal of -so much of the law as requires the payment of three months’ 
extra wages to seamen discharged in foreign ports with their own consent or for 
cause. 

II. That vessels engaged in the foreign trade and in the traffic with the Pacilic, be 
permitted to withdraw stores, supplies, and rigging from bonded warehouse free of 
duty. 

HI- That all consular charges against vessels be abolished. 

IV. That the liability of the part owner of a vessel be limited to the proportion of 
his ownership therein. 

V. That for the return of seamen to their home port, 50 cents per day be fixed as 
the compensation, instead of the present sum of $10 for the passage. 

YI. That captains, licensed after examination by United States inspectors, lie al¬ 
lowed to pilot their own vessels, without liability for pilotage fees. 

VII. That foreign material employed in the building, repair, or outfit of vessels in 
the foreign trade be made free of duty; and that, if American material is used, a sum 
be paid by the government equal to the duty on foreign material. 

VIII. A system of apprenticeship. Any vessels taking an apprentice for each 500 
tons register, to receive from government $100 per annum for each, and the apprentice, 
also, to be paid $100 per annum. 

IX. The establishment of a government department of commerce, under a Cabinet 
officer, with powers and duties similar to those of the British Board of Trade. 

X. The regulation of seamen’s wages. 

FOR THE REASONS. 

I. Extra wages to seamen discharged abroad for cause or with their own consent . — 
This system lias grown into an abuse, and is now a serious burden upon our com¬ 
merce. Although originally designed to protect the American sailor, it often operates 
against him in favor of the foreign seaman. For instance, if an American sailor ships 
at Yokohama for the voyage to Hong Kong, he must be paid uot only the wages of the 
passage, but three months’ extra wages, when discharged there, whilst if .a foreigner, 
the sailor would cost the ship only a month’s wages for the passage. For this reason 
no captain will employ Americans abroad, because our law imposes a penalty for doing 
it. 

Again, the law unjustly discriminates against the American vessel-owner, in favor 
of the seaman, who is almost invariably a foreigner. It absurdly stipulates that 
whenever a seaman is “entitled” to his discharge in a foreign port, or whenever he 
is discharged u with his own consent,” the ship must pay three months’ wages more 
than he has earned, or than his contract calls for. 

Again, the law offers a premium upon incompetency, upon misrepresentation at the 
consulate, and upon conduct calculated, in the mind of the seaman, to provoke a dis¬ 
charge abroad, for the express purpose of receiving extra wages. 

Once more, the conditions under which the law was framed no longer exist. Steam 
has largely displaced sail, insuring rapid and frequent communications with and be¬ 
tween all parts of the world. 

No other country so burdens its commerce; and as American vessels are no longer 
• required to ship only American seamen, the law discriminates in favor of the foreigner, 
by favoring him in a way not required by his own government at the expense of the 
American ship-owner. 

The necessity of the law, therefore, no longer exists. If it were intended to protect 
the seaman at the expense of the ship-owner, it has been one of those steps, which in 
driving the American ship from the seas, has driven the American seaman from his 
occupation. 

II. Stores for vessels in foreign and Pacific trades to be withdrawn, free of duty. —The 
question of free trade versus protection cannot apply upon the sea in the same man¬ 
ner as upon the land. Within the limits of the country, the competing parties are 
equally citizens, subject to the same laws, and equally bearing the same legal bur¬ 
dens. 

The ocean, however, is the free highway of nations. Our ships coming into direct 
competition with those of other countries, all more favored than our own, are handi¬ 
capped by the burdens imposed by our laws, from which their competitors are free. 
Our government, therefore, by its duties upon stores and materials, forces those who 
maintain our Hag upon the sea, either to abandon their business or to conduct it upon 
a less margin than our foreign rivals. 

Again, upon merchandise withdrawn from warehouse and exported beyond our bor¬ 
ders, the government very justly refunds duties which had been paid thereon, and 


4 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


allows the goods to repass out of the country free of the tax. Now, the ocean is no 
more a portion of our country than are the lands beyond, and the same goods passing 
out of the country upon our ships, for consumption beyond our borders, upon the high 
seas, should be allowed to pass out equally free. 

The present system further operates against our people by offering a premium for 
our ships to procure their supplies, sails, rigging, &c., so far as possible, abroad, to 
the loss of trade to us. 

III. Abolition of consular charges. —Consuls, as officers representing the whole United 
States, should be paid by the government. Their charges are almost wholly against 
commerce, while their services are not restricted to shipping, but, on the contrary, 
extend to all citizens visiting tlieir ports. 

IV. Limitation of part-owners'’ liability .—Shares of ownership in vessel property are 
in fractions of halves, quarters, eighths, sixteenths, &c. As these portions are sepa¬ 
rately salable, it is impossible for any part-owner, by the exercise of caution, to pro* 
tect himself as to liability against the others. The principle of vessel ownership is 
therefore in no sense a partnership, but is more nearly akin to that of the ownership 
of shares in a joint-stock concern. Upon the same principle, the law should fix the 
liability of a part-owner for any claim against the vessel to the same proportion that 
his share bears to the whole. This would result in no injustice or hardship to claim¬ 
ants, for the reason that the vessel herself is liable, and can be libeled and held until 
a settlement is effected. 

Y. A rate per dag instead of per voyage for the passage of returning seamen. —Justice to 
the ship manifestly requires this amendment. At present the same iixed rate of $10 
is allowed for transportation from Australia as from the West Indies, without regard 
to distance or length of voyage. 

VI. ( nited States pilotage law. —Compulsory pilotage is one of the unnecessary exac¬ 
tions, which, whilst primarily paid by the ship, is at least partially borne by the pro¬ 
ducer and the consumer of the interior, as well as the ship and the merchant at the 
seaport. 


As a tribute, therefore, levied at our portals upon all that passes in and out of the 
country, it is an arbitrary imposition of the States, and is much behind the spirit of 
the age as the obsolete toll-gate to which it is akin. 

It has also become unnecessary. As regards sailing vessels, they are almost in¬ 
variably towed into and out of port. The tow-boats cruise far out at sea in search 
of employment. Their captains are necessarily expert pilots. The boats not only 
perform their duty of towing at less than the pilotage charges, but they are responsi¬ 
ble for damages resulting from negligence. And yet, even with the tug, the vessel, 
under the State law, must employ a pilot who is not so responsible. 

As regards steamers, the captain, who by years of training, has attained his com¬ 
mand, and who perhaps, at short intervals, for years has passed in and out of a certain 
port, and thoroughly knows its channels, currents, and difficulties, and who, there¬ 
fore, is as competent to continue his voyage to the wharf as to the entrance to the 
harbor must also employ a pilot whom he does not need and submit to a heavy State 
tax therefor. 

At the port of New lork the pilotage for a vessel dra wing 21 feet in and 23 feet out 
is $250, while at Liverpool it is only $67. 

No disparagement is intended to the pilots as a class. They are a brave and hardy 
set of men. No fear that their occupation would cease, for many vessels would stiil 
employ them. 

But, owing to the conflicting interests, we suggest as a compromise measure that 
pilotage be removed from State control and be managed by the United States, where * 
it naturally belongs. 

Ihe general government has surveyed, buoyed, charted, and lighted the harbors, 
and annually spends immense sums upon them for the benefit not of the pilot, but of 
the shipmaster. Iu this view the government has forbidden the employment of 
pilots in the Navy. Ihe commerce that passes in and out deals directly with the 
united States, and it seems eminently fitting that they should also control the pilot¬ 
age of their own waters. 

0 , T , he precedent has already been made. Sections 4442, 4443, and 4444 of the United 
. dates he\ lsed statutes provide that masters and officers of American steam vessels iu 
Arneiican waters may pilot their own vessels, upon being licensed, after examination 
by local inspectors, and not be liable to any compulsorv pilotage imposed by the law 
of any State. J r 

We ask that this provision be enlarged so as to extend to the masters of all vessels, 
upon the same condition of examination aud license. 

, yn. Foreign material for ships to be duty free. American material to have a bounty equal 
impOTte l^st"^^ 011 * 1C 8Ul)< ’ eCt f° re ig u material the same principles apply as upon 

As regards domestic material, encouragement is necessary for the development of 
the production of steel and iron plates for ship-building, and as an inducement for 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


5 


the establishment of ship-yards with their costly machinery and appliances. There 
is reason to believe that this would result in the home production of a better class of 
metal than is now imported, and that, therefore, the restoration of our shipping marine 
would be coupled with an important development of a valuable national resource, in 
which the whole country is interested. 

\ III. Apprentices. —The proportion of Americans among the seamen manning our 
vessels—national as well as mercantile—is very small. The solution of the problem 
how to permanently restore as well as to elevate the class, now almost extinct, is ob¬ 
viously, through the education of the young, to replace the present sailor. They 
should have the fostering care of Congress, as a national duty, and it is but reason¬ 
able that government should be at a slight expense necessary to educate and train 
its future seamen. 

IX. Department of commerce. —This we conceive to be one of the most important con¬ 
siderations, embracing, in fact, all the others. 

There can be little doubt that had we in our governmental organism such a depart¬ 
ment our shipping would never have been driven from the seas. The department 
would have been quick to perceive the need of legislation, and Congress would have 
responded with alacrity to its call for relief. 

Preferably it should embrace all the bureaus now scattered through various depart¬ 
ments. but more naturally belonging together under one head, ami that head a Cab¬ 
inet officer. It should have the scope of the British Board of Trade, aud should con¬ 
trol the Coast Survey, Light-House, Marine Hospital, Life-Saving, and Hydrographic 
services, as well as pilotage, ship-building, the shipping, protection, and payment of 
seamen, the examination and certification of masters and officers, survey and inspec¬ 
tion of vessels and of life-saving appliances, regulations for preventing collisions at 
sea, commercial statistics, examination into disasters, and discipline, &c., and espe¬ 
cially it should report to Congress, from time to time, what legislation is necessary to 
protect and st imulate the commerce of the country. 

X. Seamen’s xeatjes. —Obvious improvement in the present system would be to make 
the payment of advance wages a penal offense ; to permit the seaman to leave a half¬ 
pay order for the benefit of liis wife or family; and to allow captains to make con¬ 
tract direct with seamen for the voyage or for a stated time. 

In conclusion, we believe that Congress, as well as the country, is alive to the 
importance of reviving our commerce, as is evidenced by the alacrity with which 
acts for its relief were recently passed, and your committee created to report the 
measures necessary to its revival; and we respectfully bespeak your earnest consid¬ 
eration of the suggestions we have made. 

CONSULAR CHARGES AND ILLEGAL THREE MONTH’S PAY COLLECTED, VESSEL BEING 

CONDEMNED AT ST. THOMAS. 

The American bark Martin W. Brett put into St. Thomas in distress, and was there 
condemned as unseaworthy, and sold in March, 1881. 

The consular charges were as follows: 

F ees: 

Tonnage (449 tons). 

Discharging nine men. 

Noting protest.. 

Protest versus extra wages. .. 

Extending protest. 

Certificates. 

Order of arrest and release. 

Receiving and filing tenders.. 

Warrants to survey. 

Notifying surveyors. -y . 

Recording and filing. 

Furnishing copies of extended protest, surveys, and other papers 

Furnishing copies of protest and other papers to master. 

United States consul, first survey. 

United States consul, second survey. 

United States consul, survey of estimates.. 


Total. 

United States consul, three months’ extra pay to crew 


Grand total. yy 

In response to an application to the government for a return of the excessive fees 
and the extra wages, the Treasury Department replied that the former '■ were in 


$4 49 
9 00 
*2 00 
3 00 
9 50 
28 00 
2 00 

5 00 

6 00 
9 00 

14 00 
75 00 

15 00 
*24 00 
*24 00 
48 00 


*277 99 
55*2 00 
























6 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


accordance with tlic tariff of fees prescribed by the consular regulations, and could 
not be,refunded; but that the extra wages had been exacted under a misinterpreta¬ 
tion of the regulations. One-third of the $552 was therefore refunded. As tor the 
remainder, the State Department advised that the remedy of the owner would appear 
to be in a civil suit against the former consul, who had meanwhile been replaced by 
another. 

Necessity for allowing vessels in foreign and Pacific trades to withdraw stores from bond 

duty free. 


Price here. Drawback. 


Sugar, cut loaf. 

ci’uslied...- - 

powdered... 

granulated.. 

soft... 

raw.. 

Dice. 

Tobacco. 

Manilla rope. 

Matches. 

Other articles, too numerous to particularize. 


per pound. $0 09 

...do_ 09jj 

...do. 09§ 

_do. 09 

... do- 08g 

....do. 07 

....do.... 05J 

....do. 34 

....do. 16 

.per gross. 2.25 


3.18 cents, less 1 percent. 

3.18 cents, less 1 per cent. 

3.18 cents, less 1 percent. 
3.15 cents, less 1 per cent. 
2. 58 cents, less 1 per cent. 
2 . 08 cents, less 1 percent. 
2. 75 cents. 

16 cents. 

02 cents. 

$1. 40. 


It is suggested that the cost of permit should not exceed one dollar for each with¬ 
drawal. 

HARDSHIP OF REQUIREMENT THAT ALL OFFICERS OF AMERICAN VESSELS RE AMERICAN 

CITIZENS. 

[Revised Statutes, section 4131.] 

The American bark Thomas Fletcher was fined $129.20 (20 cents per registered ton) 
in San Francisco, July 28, 1879, for having employed at Hong-Kong, an officer, not 
an American citizen, for the voyage from Hong-Kong, China, to Nanaimo, British 
Columbia, and thence to San Francisco, when no American citizen could be found to 
fill the vacancy, as appears by certificates of the United States consuls at those ports. 

The Maritime Association of the port of New York, by 

CHARLES F. ELWELL, President. 

F. W. HOUGHTON, Secretary. 

ANSWERS TO THE QUERIES OF THE JOINT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE 

APPOINTED TO INQUIRE INTO THE CONDITION AND WANTS OF THE 

SHIP.BUILDING AND SHIP-OWNING INTERESTS. 

By Hon. William Rogers, Arthur Sew a ll, and Jarvis Fatten. 

Hon. William Rogers, of Bath, Me,, stated that he was a member of the Bath 
Board of Trade, as well as a ship-builder and ship-owner, and that at a convention 
held in New York last week the Bath Board of Trade sent a representation, who had 
officially prepared matters to be presented to the committee. He also stated that he 
indorsed the recommendation of the Maritime Association of New York. 

Mr. Rogers submitted the following answers to the questions of the committee: 

r . 

ANSWERS. 

BY WILLIAM ROGERS. 

To the Hon. H. F. Page and members of the Joint Select Committee : , 

Gentlemen : In addressing your committee in reply to the questions you have pro' 
pounded, permit us to say at the beginning that we do so largely as the representa¬ 
tives of wooden sailing tonnage, believing, as we do, that it will be many years yet 
before the building of them will cease or their usefulness have departed. We shall 
endeavor to present facts only in our replies in accordance with what many years of 
experience with such property has taught to be their necessities as they stand" to-day, 
leaving the questions of subsidies, postal service, and the consideration of existing 
treaties with other countries for future examination, the revision of which latter we 
























AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


7 


believe to be of the utmost importance for future success of our commerce. We believe 
in progress in every direction, and feel sensibly that t-lie great changes which have 
been accomplished in the carrying trade by the use of, and improvements of, steam 
have arisen from the very necessities of the case, and desire that everything shall 
be done to promote its further progress, believing that wherein we ask for aid in 
wood it will apply with equal force in that direction, and mutually beneficial. 

Question 1. As this interrogatory divides the construction of vessels into two classes, 
iron or steel on the one side and wood on the other, I confine myself to that with 
whichl am familiar. Having had opportunity to examine many vessels built of the 
cheaper woods in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, provinces of England, where 
it is presumed they can be constructed very cheaply, I most unhesitatingly 
state that I have never examined one which I could not duplicate with similar 
workmanship and woods at as low a cost, and I thought at a reasonable margin as 
profit. Therefore, reasoning from my stand-point as regards wood, I conclude that 
those who in this country build of iron and are experts in that branch, ought to do 
the same, and believe they can when this government affords the opportunity to ob- 
taie their materials on equal terms. 

Q. 2. I regard this question as too strongly put. There is undoubtedly a small mar¬ 
gin of profit under the present high cost of tonnage to this country and the more un¬ 
satisfactory laws by which it is managed. Therefore were we to fall heir to all that is 
required for the transportation of merchandise, this present small margin would be 
considered most remunerative, and we should hardly trouble ourselves about the modi¬ 
fication of laws, provided the supply of tonnage was adequate to our ideas and would 
prove a powerful ally and 1 think an effective one, enabling us to compete for the 
carrying trade with vessels of all nationalities. It is purely a question of profit. If 
ships pay well upon the amount invested they will be constructed and kept at work. 
If the laws of this and other countries are obnoxious and detrimental ships will surely 
subside and decay, now ones not built. Men are stimulated by hope. They continue 
to suffer financially in this direction, as in other industries, with a conviction in their 
own minds that those who have it in their power to hear their petition will examine 
thenr claims and redress their grievances, modify and repeal such laws as experi¬ 
ence has taught and time has proved to be useless and inapplicable-for the pur- 
X>ose for which they ^vere enacted and detrimental to the present condition and 
method of doing business. Therefore it is hardly fair that the question of first cost 
should be so seriously considered, but rather the questions of economy and justice in 
the sailing and management after ships are built and put afloat. 

Q. 3. First. Repeal entire the following sections of the Revised Statutes, viz, 4581, 
4583, 4584, and parts of sections 4561, 4580, 4582, which relate to the discharge and 
payment of three months’ extra wages to seamen in a foreign port, and allow ships 
to employ seamen upon such terms and for such period of time as they can mutually 
agree. The injustice which those sections work upon owners of American commerce 
can be shown to be enormous. The justice which was intended when enacted was ap¬ 
propriate and good. The changes, however, which a series of fifty to one hundred years 
produces, operate in an entirely different manner and upon an entirely different class 
of men than what was then “American seamen.” 

Second. Abolish all fees of United States consular office now collected from ship¬ 
ping. 

Third. That all compulsory pilotage be abolished in the United States; make pilot¬ 
age free to all competitors. 

Fourth. Repeal the last clause of section 4131, which requires officers in all cases to 
be citizens of the United States. 

Fifth. Amend section 4578, regarding compensation for transportation of destitute 
seamen, inserting an adequate compensation for service rendered. 

Sixth. Amend section 4600 by repealing all but the first sentence. 

Seventh. Establish bonded warehouses from which can be drawn all needed sup¬ 
plies during a voyage. 

Eighth. Abolish advance wages being paid by any vessel in American ports under 
severe penalties. 

Ninth. Change the present tonnage tax of thirty cents per yearly payment to ten 
cents per ton, payable every entrance from a foreign port. 

Tenth. Relief from taxation. 

Eleventh. Limited liabilities of individual ownership. 

Q. 4. Not being familiar with the laws of other nations, I cannot draw compari¬ 
sons. . . 

Q. 5. If it is meant by this question that repealing our navigation laws is to admit 
ships of foreign builds “free ships,” so called, I most unhesitatingly say, “not so.’ 
Rather repeal and modify to that extent which will enable us to both build and sail 
our vessels as well and cheaply as can be done by any nation on the globe. 

Q. 6. Comparing the cost of materials in other countries with those in this is be- 
yond my ability. ~Thc law of supply and demand in each country enters into the case 


8 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


and renders such comparisons very unreliable. Give us, however, wise laws that will 
enable us to test the market of the world and we will soon prove their efficiency. 

Q. 7. Clearly enough, the ability to obtain materials (with which to construct the 
vessel) where they can be bought the cheapest, and thus as an investment they would 
have no more in their stock in trade (of the same wares) than those of other nations, 
dra wing nearer to an equality upon that point, and also in ability to compete accord¬ 
ing to the query in number two, though perhaps not obtainable quite so low as it 
suggested. 

Q. 8. In presenting any statement connected with the cause in addition to those 
required by the preceding questions, I do not wish to weary with anything unneces¬ 
sary, but, having been continually for thirty-six years an owner of ships engaged in 
the foreign trade, shall endeavor to show the operation of present laws from realities, 
and not by theories of writers who take up these questions from a desire to see them¬ 
selves in print, and who do not, norpossibly never have, owned a ton of shipping so 
employed, and who therefore cannot be familiar with the working of the laws. The 
testimony, therefore, shall be taken from bona fide accounts, moneys paid, losses in¬ 
curred, and put briefly as possible, touching a few of the points which have been 
presented for your consideration. 

THAT OFFICERS SHALL IX ALL CASES BE AMERICANS. 

Much objection has been made to the repeal of that clause, but it has been from 
those who have never known the Inside view. Our laws as they now stand recognize 
a man employed as a seaman on shipboard to be an American, that is, when he is 
employed as a common sailor and lives in the forward part of the ship. If that ship 
sails from New York to Hong-Ivong, discharges her cargo, and having two men as 
sailors of foreign birth, who prove to be steady and intelligent men, and from some 
cause the officers, first and second mates of the ship, have become incapacitated and 
their places must be supplied, the master not being able to find at that port Amer¬ 
icans who can fill the position, cannot take thetwomen he may have on board (which 
he knows can satisfy his need), though recognized in the forecastle as Americans, and 
move their worldly effects into the cabin or after end of the ship, using them as % of- 
ticers to get his ship over to San Francisco, the nearest home port, without being* 
liable to a fine of fifty cents per registered ton. In short, the law recognizes the sailor 
as an American citizen when in the forward end of the ship. ' Move him aft and he 
becomes no longer entitled to the rights of an American, but is an alien, and the ship 
liable to the tine, no matter how important to the lives of those on board or how val¬ 
uable a cargo may require the skill and services of competent officers. It is a re¬ 
striction both unwise and unjust. 

TIIE TONNAGE TAX. 

Though it seems onerous, having been placed upon shipping as one of the necessities 
of war, yet if properly adjusted is one in which all will concur as not being “too 
grievous to be borne.” Our treaties with other nations stipulate that such taxes as 
they impose upon their own tonnage shall be imposed upou ours and vice versa. Take 
for example England, and let us see how the expenses on a ship operates. I give you 
for example the American ship Bombay and the British steamer Bulgarian. That 
ship, the Bombay, with cotton from Galveston, entered Liverpool June 15, 1880. 
Her tonnage is 955 tons. She paid for so-called tonnage-dues £70 12$, fid.; anchor 
dues, £10$. ‘.id .; light dues, £11 11$. 9 <1. Then for a little cotton on deck they meas¬ 
ured the space it occupied, brought it into tons and charged her additional, for ton¬ 
nage dues, £1 4$.; additional light dues, 3$. 9rf.; total, £85 12$. fid. September, 1880, 
she again entered that port, paying for tonnage dues, anchorage dues, light dues, and 
a charge for Cape Race light of 19d., with extra charges of extra tonnage and light 
dues, a total, £95 18$. 3d. Again, in February, 1881, she entered thatjiort, paying* 
£90, making a total in our money of over $1,200 for one year. 

The steamer Bulgarian is 400 feet long, 37 beam, 28 deep. Her registered tonnage 
is 3,1114 tons. She pays the tax of thirty cents per ton, therefore amounting to the 
sum of $933 45. She comes into this port some ten trips per year, and that is all she 
pays. If she paid us as the Bombay paid her expenses in England, we should receive 
more than $10,000 on her registered tonnage alone. That is not all. Toe llect on 
additional tonnage which she had by building buildings for carrying cattle, and for 
spaces which they could inclose by ingenious devices, we could have collected *it upon 
not less than 1,000 tons additional each trip, or 10,000 tons for the year. Such is the 
practical operation of our tonnage-tax to-day. Is it just upon our commerce ? 

CONSULAR FEES. 

1 wish to place before you a copy of what are the stereotype charges which every 
ship is subjected to on entering a foreign port. Taking two at random from the 
papers of the American ship Matilda, 849 tons register. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Caldera, January 25, 18?::. 
American ship Matilda to United States Consulate, I>r. 


For deposit of papers. 49 ? 

two spare rolls. 4 Off 

difference in exchange. 4 05 

shipping nine men. 4 50 

one crew-list. 1 00 

noting desertion of eight men. 4 Off 

one desertion-list. 1 do- 


24 24 

Greenock, Jan nary 14, 18??, 
Ship Matilda to United States Consnlate, Dr. 


» 

For tonnage fees. 49 

Noting protest. 2 0<> 

Shipping eleven men. 11 Off 

Desertion eleven men.,. 5 5 <> 

Articles.♦. 2 Off- 


os 99“ 

They constitute a fair illustration of a few items in a ship’s expenses, and perhaps 
are sufficient for the present purpose. Men have been appointed to the position as 
consul whose experience has never been in accord with its duties, and who on en¬ 
tering upon them assume that a ship is one of the objects of legal plunder. Connected 
therewith, and in the same catalogue, comes the 

THREE MONTHS’ EXTRA PAYMENT OF WAGES. 

You will notice upon the two papers offered there is the item of eight men as de¬ 
serters upon one and eleven men as deserters on the other. It may be remarked that 
with fifteen bills of entries by this vessel into foreign ports, all but three contain 
charges for desertion by the consul. It is well known by the masterand owners what 
this implies. Scarcely a vessel which does not have the experience and similar ex¬ 
pense of from one man upwards, and the three months’ extra wages comes in some¬ 
where or somehow, constituting one of the most outrageous items of expense and 
trouble American masters have to contend with. Allow me to give one of the per¬ 
haps extreme examples, by quoting from a letter from the managing owners of the 
ship William G. Davis. 


Portland, Xor ember 4, 1882. 

Wm. Rogers, Bath, Me. : 

Dear Sir: Yours of 5th at hand. The crew of ship Wm. G. Davis deserted or* 
arrival at Bordeaux. The consul exacted three months’-extra pay, amounting t< 
4.562 francs 15 centimes, or about $900, which has never been refunded. 

J. S. WINSLOW & CO. 

This is not an isolated case by any means, quoted, however, to show the wholesale- 
robbery which is done to shipping when within the power of parties to effect it. 

In conclusion, permit me to say, should this government bestow upon its citizens- 
engaged in its commercial pursuits, first, the rebate upon all articles which enter 
into the construction and equipment of vessels engaged in the foreign trade, and 
their repairs, with the privilege of obtaining from bond all articles required for use- 
while upon their voyages, second, repeal, modify, and enact laws to correspond with 
the suggestions now made to your committee, they cau then construct and sail theii 
vessels in competition and with equal profit as can vessels of the most favored na¬ 
tions. We have unwavering faith in the American citizen and sailor, his skill and 
his enterprise. We know what he has done in the past, and with proper recognition 
by his government, he will soon recover his supremacy upon the sea, not only in the 
peaceful pursuits, but when the day of national adversity comes he will not be found, 
wanting in patriotism, nor power to support and maintain her honor. 
















10 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


ANSWERS BY ARTHUR SEWALL. 

Question 1. The reason we cannot build iron or steel vessels in this country as 
■cheaply as in other countries is on account of the higher cost of material in this coun¬ 
try. As compared with England, the cost of material for an iron or steel vessel will 
be about 30 per cent, higher, and nearly the same difference in labor, rating it per day, 
but our labor is sufficiently superior to theirs as to accomplish nearly as much more 
per day as our wages exceed theirs; therefore I conclude the only permanent and 
valid reason why we cannot construct iron and steel ships in this country as cheaply 
as in Europe is the difference in the cost of the material. We can build wooden ves¬ 
sels as cheaply as in any other country. 

Q. *2. Yes. Give me an iron or steel or good woodeu vessel without cost, and I can 
run it successfully in competition with the world. The saving of interest on capital 
will just about offset the advantage other countries now enjoy over ours, in their more 
reasonable laws relating to this interest. 

Q. 3. The entire expense of our consular system should be borne by the government. 
Tonnage should not be subject to any charges by our consulate. Ship-owners and 
masters should have the right to contract with their officers and crews for such com¬ 
pensation and term of service as shall be mutually agreed upon, without the interfer¬ 
ence of the government, either through its consular system or shipping commission 
(the latter should be abolished), leaving the ship-owner as free to manage his busi¬ 
ness as any other common carrier, with the same right to hire and discharge the labor 
his business requires as any other citizen. • All customs and port charges excepting 
pilotage and wharfage should be abolished. Pilotage should not be compulsory. 
Tonnage engaged in the foreign trade, receiving as it does its title of ownership and 
protection from the government, should be considered national in its character, and 
be made exempt by Congress from local and State taxation. This is one of t he great¬ 
est burdens on American shipping to-day, from which it should be relieved. Ships in 
foreign trade should be allowed to take all their supplies, stores, outfit, and material 
for repairs out of bond duty free. All material for the construction and furnishing of 
iron, steel, or wooden vessels for foreign trade should be admitted free. 

Q. 4. In England tonnage is exempt from taxation (except a slight tax on income). 
Owners can contract for their crews and officers on such terms as may be mutually 
agreed upon. Stores and supplies of every kind can be taken from bond duty free. 

Q. 5. Should not recommend changing our navigation laws until all other methods 
of reviving our merchant marine have been exhausted. 

Q. 6. Have no statistics to answer this question by. 

Q. 7. Just iu the proportion that a “ rebate” reduces the cost of a vessel to this 
■extent the vessel is better enabled to compete with the lower cost vessels of foreign 
build. Remove all duties on all material, and tonnage of all kinds will be built as 
•cheaply here as elsewhere. 

Q. 8. The causes of the continued decline of our merchant marine are: 

First. Increased cost of construction as compared with other countries, which is 
principally in the increased cost of material. 

Second. Increased cost of sailing and maintaining our tonnage as compared to that 
of the countries we have to compete with. This increased cost of sailing, &c., is 
principally made up of taxes, national, State, and local, duties on supplies of foreign 
production, consular charges, shipping commission, Ac. 

Relieve us of all the foregoing burdens and discriminations, and I think in time, 
with the energy and enterprise of the American people, they will build up a merchant 
marine which will successfully compete with the world. But this, for this rapid age, 
is too slow a process, and it will take too long to recover lost ground, to again regain 
the supremacy on the sea, and in the foreign carrying trade of which we were dis¬ 
possessed during the war. We need, deserve, and must have a more rapid and radi¬ 
cal remedy, one that will repossess us in a few years. It is this: Our treaties must be 
revised and modified as far as they relate to our merchant marine. They were framed 
for a very different condition of things than those which exist at present. We must 
recognize the fact that to-day we are the largest exporting nation of the world; that 
■our foreign carrying trade is worth more than that of any other nation; that a mer¬ 
chant marine which could do half our own export carrying trade would be larger 
than any existing to-day; that it is not just to our own tonnage to throw this im¬ 
mense trade of ours open ou even terms to foreign tonnage whose flag has no*trade 
with which to reciprocate. Why give the Italian,^the Norwegian, or the Swede the 
same privileges and rights to our immense carrying trade as our flag? Modify our 
treaties and reciprocate fully with the commercial nations. Give to England the 
same privilege in the carrying trade between her ports and her colonies and our 
country as our own vessels have, and stop here. We will take care of the trade be¬ 
tween us and South America and the Philippines. We will give our own tonnage a 
preference in this trade. On what principle of reciprocity do we invite the Italian 
■ >r Norwegian tonnage to participate with us on equal terms with our own in carry- 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


11 


.liiT our oil to Japan or our grain to England ? What have they to give us in return ? 
(rive our own tonnage some preference by a slight discriminating duty or tax in for¬ 
eign tonnage, in trades peculiarly our own. This to be consistent with the fullest 
reciprocal treaties with all commercial countries, and this, with free material for con¬ 
struction, repairs, and maintaining and relief from other burdens mentioned, will so 
stimulate investments in tonnage as will within a very short time give us the most 
powerful merchant marine in the world. 

A. S. 

November (5, 188*2. 


ANSWERS BY JARVIS PATTEN. 


f Bath, November 10, 1882. 

Sin : Having been invited in common with others to reply to the several questions 
propounded by the joint special committee on shipping, I beg to submit the follow- 
ing, apologizing, liwoever, for the brevity with which I have treated a subject 
which deserves a more exhaustive inquiry. Indeed, the questions submitted by the 
committee appear to cover the whole subject-matter so completely that it is to be 
hoped that the different responses you may receive in reply "will leave no point of the 
question untouched. 

Question 1. Our ship-builders, both of wood and iron vessels, claim to be able to 
produce as good a ship as can be built in any part of the world; and although the 
lung experience of Great Britain in the construction of vessels of the latter class, es¬ 
pecially of ocean steamers, would consequently give the ship-builders of that country 
the advantage; it is just to assume that with a few years’ experience the best class 
ot iron and steel steamships could be built as well in this country as in England or 
Scotland. I therefore answer the first clause of this interrogatory by saying that this 
country can build iron, steel, or wooden vessels as well as Scotland, England, or 
other countries. In reply to the latter clause of the question, why they cannot be 
built as cheaply, there can be but two reasons given. 

First. Because the materials that go into the construction of ships (especially of 
iron ships) cost more in this country. 

Second. Because the price of labor is higher with us. If, as lias been estimated, 
there are one hundred thousand days’ labor in building a first-class steamship of 
2,000 t<*is measurement, then the difference in labor alone will amount to an average 
of $50,000 against us and in favor of England. 

Q. 2. 1 presume that the object of this inquiry is to ascertain the comparative cost 
of the sailing of ships under different flags ; and instead of taking the question as it 
reads in the text, 1 assume that a word has been dropped, and shall answer it as if the 
first sentence read “If we had such vessels without extra cost to us,” Ac. 

My reply to this question is that “such vessels could not be run by us in compe¬ 
tition with those countries who build their own vessels and run them with their own 
officers and crews without a modification or repeal of existing laws.” The competition 
on the ocean, where all nations can enter the lists, is very strong-, and the margin of 
profits, on an average, is necessarily close 1 . The country that sails its ships under 
tlie most favorable laws must in the long run win the race. The laws regulating our 
merchant marine were as good as those of other countries at the time they were made, 
but while other nations have kept pace with the times and changed their statutes to 
suit the circumstances of the age ours have remained statu quo ante helium —a very 
creditable relic of the wise statesmanship of a former generation. The burdens that 
our ships have to bear, which are common to other countries, are none of them es¬ 
pecially onerous, but, being several in number, amount in the aggregate to a considera¬ 
ble discriminating tax—“ mony littles mak a mickle,” and I believe these burdens, 
though trilling and vexatious when taken separately, but oppressive in the gross, 
have been no small factor in bringing our merchant marine to its present deplorable 
condition. Although some instance may be cited of successful American lines, and 
rapidly acquired fortunes in the shipping business, I think the cases of that kind 
met with during the present generation have been more the result of individual en¬ 
ergy and a run of good luck than of long continued prosperity under a beneficent 
maritime policy. 

Q. J. The principal customs duty or port charge levied in the United States is the 
tonnage duty of JO cents per ton per annum on all vessels of the United States in the 
foreign trade and on all foreign vessels entering ports of the United States. As we 
have no light duty, so called, and its our government is charged with the expense of 
the maintenance of the light-houses and beacons along our coasts, this tax may be 
considered as an offset to the light dues which are levied on sill vessels upon entering 
any British port. But this tax is not only excessively high, but by being made paya¬ 
ble annually (instead of per voyage like the English light dues), is levied in such a 
manner as to operate as a discriminating tax against our own Hag; at least such is 
the case now, from the fact that we have only sailing ships in the foreign trade, while 



12 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


the English foreign trade to this country is nearly all done in steamer. For example: 
Let ns take ten of onr sailingsliips of 2,000 tons each that are in the foreign trade and 
compare what they pay and value received with the same number of foreign steam¬ 
ers of the same tonnage trading to the United States. The ten sailingsliips will have 
to pay the same amount of tax as the steamers, say $600 each, making $6,000 in full 
that the government receives from them. For this amount the ten sailing ships have 
visited our ports and enjoyed the benefit of our lights, beacons, and harbor facilities, 
on an average, twice per year; say twenty times in all; while the foreign steamers 
averaging at least six voyages, enjoy the same privileges sixty times. The United 
States receives the same pay from each, say, .$6,000 from the ten Americans and $6,000 
from the ten foreigners, say $12,000 in all. Let us now suppose we adopt the English 
plan of collecting this tax per voyage, and see how much we can reduce it and its 
bearing on these same vessels. Let uS fix the tonnage tax at one-quarter of the pres¬ 
ent rate, say 7-J cents per ton for every entry from a foreign port, instead of 60 cents 
per ton yearly. The ten United States sailing ships would then pay the sum of 
$3,000 during the year, and the foreign steamers would pay the sum of $10,500, while 
the United States would receive $13,500 from the twenty vessels instead of $12,000 un¬ 
der the present system. It may be objected that the above example does not show 
the whole field of operations, and I only give it as an approximative illustration, 
but it is safe to say that the tonnage tax discriminates against the sailing ship, and 
it should be reduced and changed, and although the agents of the various foreign 
steamship lines in this country would doubtless raise a hue and cry against it, it 
would only be adopting the system of almost every foreign nation, and one of the 
most approved reciprocity. 

The other items enumerated in query III. such as port dues ami pilotage, being local 
charges, are regulated by the respective States in whose waters the various ports 
are situated and I will not speak of them here. 

Q. 4. England is our greatest competitor on the ocean; for now the tars of the 
British merchant navy as well as the old man-of-war salt may truly sing, “ Britan¬ 
nia rules the wave.” It would take too much time to attempt to discuss all the 
causes that have led to the present situation. Great Britain lias always taken great 
pride in her merchant navy and her fostering care of the maritime interests has doubt¬ 
less had its influence. There, the least change in the policy of another country, the 
least overcharge affecting the shipping interest, is made cause of complaint, and Her 
Majesty’s government immediately institutes an iuqniry with a view to relief. By 
the British merchant shipping act of 1854, the board of trade was appointed^whose 
president holds a seat in the Queen’s cabinet of ministers), as a department to super¬ 
intend shipping matters and to carry into effect the acts of Parliament relating thereto. 
Since that time no less than eleven supplementary merchant shipping acts have been 
introduced and passed by Parliament amending and improving the original statutes. 

In matters of general nautical supervision and discipline of seamen local marine 
boards are appointed under the superintendence of the board of trade, to examine cap¬ 
tains and officers, and furnish them with certificates of competency, establish ship¬ 
ping offices, and appoint shipping masters who keep registers of seamen and afford fa¬ 
cilities for and superintend the shipment and discharge of seamen and provide 
means for getting them on board at the proper time, & o. A table of fees payable on 
the engagement and discharge of seamen is hung up in the shipping office and the 
ship-owner is to pay those fees and reimburse himself by deducting the amount 
(named in table Q of the merchant shipping act) from the wages of all seamen ex¬ 
cept apprentices. No seaman has power to assign or dispose of his wages, but they 
are to be paid to the seaman himself. No debt exceeding live shillings, incurred by 
any seaman after engaging to serve, is recoverable until the service is concluded. 
Lodging-house keepers charging a seaman for any longer time than he owes for, are 
liable to a penalty of £10 

Instead of our “three mouths’ pay” law, whenever the service of any seaman be¬ 
longing to a British ship terminates at any place out of Her Majesty’s dominions, the 
master is to give to each such seaman a certificate of discharge, and besides paying 
the wages to which they may be entitled, provide them with adequate employment 
on board some other homeward-bound British ship, or furnish the means of send¬ 
ing them home, or lodge with the consul a sum of money deemed to be sufficient to 
defray their subsistence or passage home. But let no one suppose that the British 
government has no protecting arm over its seamen. British consuls (or two British 
merchants where there are no consuls) may relieve all distressed British seanieh who 
may have been shipwrecked, discharged, or left behind, until they can provide them 
with a passage home, and they will be repaid the amount expended by the British 
government. Masters of homeward-bound British ships are bound to take such dis¬ 
tressed seamen and give them a passage home under certain limitation and condi¬ 
tions, and if the seaman had been left abroad improperly, the expense is a charge on 
the ship to which he belonged. A fund, called the “ mercantile marine fund,” is es¬ 
tablished, to which various moneys payable under the merchant shipping act are 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 13 

carried, and out of which the salaries and expenses of carrying the act into execution 
are to he paid. 

The English merchant shipping act of 1862 limits the liability of ship-owners in 
respect to loss of life, or personal injury, either alone or together with loss of 
property to an aggregate amount not exceeding £15 for each ton of their ship’s ton¬ 
nage, and for loss or damage of goods or ships to £8 per ton. The shielding effect 
of such a law is apparent when we suppose one of our ships of 1,000 tons chancing to 
collide with a foreign steamer loaded with a cargo valued at half a million dollars. 
If the case were tried in Great Britain the maximum of damages would be £8,000 
($40,000), but if the ship were cast in damages in most other maritime countries the 
whole amount might be assessed. The English ship-owner is liable separately for 
separate losses. 

In France we have seen an act passed awarding a bounty to her merchant marine; 
but it is yet too earlv to judge of its effect. It stipulates that as a compensation for 
the charges which the customs tariff imposes on ship-builders they are allowed per 
ton measurement— 

Francs. 


For iron and steel vessels. CO 

mixed vessels. 40 

wooden vessels of 200 tons and over. 20 

wooden vessels under 200 tons. 10 


Also as a compensation for the charges imposed on merchant shipping for the re¬ 
cruitment (iHscriptiou) of the navy, there is allowed for a period of ten years a bounty 
applied exclusively to oversea navigation, as follows (per ton measurement per 
thousand miles run): For new ships from the stocks, 11^ francs, decreasing annu¬ 
ally; 74- centimes for wood and mixed vessels, and 5 centimes for iron vessels. An 
increase of 15 per cent, is allowed on vessels built on plans approved by the navy 
department. From this bounty 20 per cent, is deducted for the increase of pension 
of seamen on the navy inscription. 

Q. 5. Yes. Our revenue laws must be modified so as to admit all the materials that 
go into the construction of ships, both of wood and iron, free of duty, if we would 
build vessels as cheaply as they do in England, and our navigation laws must be 
modified so as to remove all restrictions and burdens not common to other nations, so 
that we may compete successfully on the ocean with ships under other iiags. 

Q. 6. If we except the rigging, anchors and chains, metal, &c., the materials of a 
wooden ship are as cheap here as abroad ; but the materials for an iron ship are about 
the amount of duty dearer. This as a rule would generally be correct, but fluctua¬ 
tions at different times in the demand and supply, cause many exceptions to the rule. 

Q. 7. A rebate of all duties on the materials that go iuto the construction of a ship, 
of any class would place our ship-builders on an equality with those of other nations 
in every respect excepting as to labor. 

Q. 8. It is evident that the condition of our merchant marine is not the effect of 
one cause but of many causes. Among them may be enumerated the three following 
principal ones: 

First. The war of the rebellion and its consequences in captures, and sales abroad 
for fear of capture, and enhanced cost of production. 

Second. The transition that has been gradually going on since the war from wood 
to iron, and sail to steam vessels, and the advantages that England possesses in the 
lower price of iron and of labor. 

Third. The disadvantages of sailing under our flag resulting from the want of 
favorable legislation required to put us on an equality with other countries. 

It has been said that the maritime spirit is dying out among us, but cases of indi¬ 
vidual enterprise and success here and there seem to prove that it is merely sleeping, 
and only wants to be aroused. Fennimore Cooper in one of his works dwells in 
patriotic terms on the advantages of our coast, especially of the noble Chesapeake 
and Delaware bays for the early training of seamen. That the rugged coasts of our own 
State afford equal advantages,' the sails of her ships which even now may be seen on 
every sea, and the long line of successful seamen who have sailed them, tally testify. 
But we must after all face the naked fact, that for the last twenty years our merchant 
shipping has been gradually declining, so that w r e are now almost in the condition 
of “ a great commercial nation without a commerce,” if I may be allowed to apply 
that term to shipping. 

According to a report lately made by a committee appointed by the Chamber of 
Commerce of New York to investigate the question, the loss to the country resulting 
from this condition is one hundred million dollars in freight earnings, besides other 
large consequential losses. And this brings me to the last and most difficult part of 
the query, the remedies. Our free-ship friends say that we will only have to repeal 
our navigation laws and allow Americans to buy ships in the cheapest market and 
• the evil would soon correct itself; and if to equalize the tonnage of the world among 






14 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


nations were the only object there is a point to their argument, for the law of supply 
and demand regulates the shipping of the world as well as other commodities—and 
presuming that there is at all times just tonnage enough afloat to do the business of 
the world, it is difficult to see how a great influx can be forced on the market with¬ 
out a corresponding depression in value of ships and freights. But to my idea the 
single object of getting tonnage under our flag is not paramount. There is a great 
home industry at stake in the case, and to admit “free ships” would at this time, 
when England has so many advantages over us, have the effect to kill our ship-yards 
gradually. Then if we had no ship-builders we should have to go abroad for our 
nary. Do these “free-ship” men intend to make us dependent on a foreign power 
for our tools to fight those same nations with in case of a war ? How would it have 
sounded if on the morning of March 9. 1862, we had read in the papers that a 
cheese-box, called the Monitor, had fortunately arrived from England the previous 
day and stopped the Merrimac in her career of destruction. Although commanded 
by the gallant Worden, and manned by his crew, such a fight might be claimed to 
be as much a victory of English iron as of American valor. 

The “stars and stripes ” would of course be a safe harbor of refuge for the large steam 
fleet of England in case she became a belligerent, and this is doubtless the reason 
we hear the question of free ships agitated whenever there is the least rumor of a war 
in Europe. But I take it for granted that a bill to build up the industries of another 
country at the expense of our own will never be passed by an American Congress. 

I am of opinion that the restoration of our shipping must necessarily be the work 
of time, and do not recommend any extreme measures such as might interfere with 
our reciprocity system or provoke retaliation. Nor do I believe in so-called subsidies 
as a rule, but to pay vessels a remunerative price for any service should not be called 
a subsidy. If an American citizen lives in the backwoods of Montana our govern¬ 
ment undertakes to carry liis letters to him at the cost of $100 apiece, but if the same 
man lives in South America, endeavoring to introduce American productions there, 
his letters must go by the way of England, unless our steamers take them for the 
regular postage. There has been great outlay made by Americans to start American 
lines and a corresponding price should be paid by government for carrying the mails, 
but it should not be termed “ a subsidy.” Give our ship-builders a chance, and put 
our navigation on a level with that of other countries, and I believe that American 
enterprise and American inventive genius will in due time work out the problem. 
Holding these views, I respectfully recommend the following measures: 

First. An act to establish a department of commerce (similar to the British Board 
of Trade) whose chief officer should superintend all matters relating to navigation, 
relieving the Secretary of the Treasury of that part of his duties. 

Second. An act allowing a drawback on all materials, whether of domestic or 
foreign production, that go into the construction of vessels, equal to the duty thereon. 

Third. An act making the tonnage dues payable at every entry of a vessel from a 
foreign port at the following rates : 

Cents. 


On vessels trading to ports in Canada, Mexico, British Columbia, and the 


Island of Cuba. 2 

On vessels to Central America and West India Islands. 5 

Other parts of the world. 10 


Fourth. An act making it lawful to discharge seamen in foreign ports without the 
payment of extra wages, providing however that no native American seaman shall be 
left abroad without suitable provision for his passage home or employment on board 
another vessel.* 

Fifth. An act providing that ships in the foreign trade be allowed to take their 
stores from bonded warehouse duty free. (Similar to the English law.) 

Sixth. An act fixing the pay for transport of wrecked seaman at 50 cents per day 
for the length of the voyage. 

Seventh. An act limiting the liability of ship-owners in cases of collision to a max¬ 
imum of $40 per ton on the vessel’s register. 

It may not be out of place in this connection to add that the question of jurisdic¬ 
tion in cases of collision on the high seas is still unsettled among nations, and the 
subject is well worthy the attention of our government. 

Respectfully, &c., 


Hon. S. S. Cox, Secretary. 


JARVIS FATTEN 


*Aecording to the French Code u Le rapatriement des onatelotsest une dette de Varmement,” and it' there 
is not enough saved from the wreck the government has a claim on the owners. Distressed seamen 
are taken home at a fixed tariff of from 1 to 3 francs per day, according to rank and circumstances. 

I have in my possession a letter lately recieved from a captain in San Francisco, where wages are 
exorbitantly high, and many ships waiting for crews. He says, ’‘English ships till up their rolls 
quickly, because the men prefer to go in ships where they will he entitled to he paid off. American 
ships are all waiting because of the law which would compel (them to become deserters if they leave 
the ship abroad.” 







AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


15 


OPINION OF G. C. GOSS. 


Sir: Owing to pressing business engagements I have not found leisure to reply at 
length to the questions submitted by the committee, but having read the answers 
of Capt. Jarvis Patten, beg to state that I concur in his views and presentation of 
the case. Give us an equal chance with other nations and American enterprise and 
inventive genius will in time restore our shipping. 

Yours, respect fully, 


Hon. S. S. Cox, Secretory. 


G. C. GOSS. 


Mr. Henry D. Welsh, of the Philadelphia Maritime Exchange, stated that there 
was a committee sent here by a convention held on the 10th of November, composed 
of members of Bath, Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore boards of trade, 
and the report of that convention had been presented to the committee by its sec¬ 
retary. 


STATEMENT OF MR. BURTT. 

Mr. J. Edward Burtt, of the New England Ship Owners’ Association of Boston, 
stated that the Boston Board of Trade, in 1877, appointed a committee to consider the 
Revised Statutes upon all questions bearing upon the shipping and discharge of seamen 
at home and abroad. The result of that deliberation occupied them about a year and 
a half, and in 1879 a report was made to the Boston Board of Trade, and adopted by 
that body, resulting in the drawing of a bill which has been before Congress for sev¬ 
eral years, and is known as the Claflin bill. That bill endeavored to cover all the 
points upon which ship-owners desired a change, and it endeavored to be fair and 
just towards the sailor. The exaction of three months’ extra pay in a foreign port 
was a fact undoubtedly known to all ship-owning interests. That law was right, and 
met the approval of the ship-owners at the time it was passed, for at that period com¬ 
munication with foreign ports was very infrequent. We then had American sailors, 
but that is all a thing of the past. 

In shipping crews from this port we do not average one in ten of American subjects 
in the foreign trade. 

To show the hardship of this three months’ extra pay, he stated that if a master 
from any cause left a sailor in any foreign port, this extra pay was demanded by the 
consul upon whom he might call in time of distress. It gave the consul the right to 
put the sailor on board any American vessel and to receive for his compensation the 
sum of $10, no matter from what part of the world the sailor was carried. So 
far as the law at. that time worked, it was proper and just because we had Ameri¬ 
can sailors. Now we have steam communication with the entire world, and former 
difficulties have been so completely overcome there is no need of leaving a sailor in 
a foreign port any length of time. 

As an illustration of the oppressive working of the law giving three months’ extra 
pay to discharged seamen, Mr. Burtt told of a vessel which discharged her crew at 
Hong Kong with the three months’ pay, amounting to $1,500. She then shipped a 
crew, went to Manilla, discharged her crew, the consul insisting on three months’ 
extra pay, although the men had only been one month aboard. So another $1,500 
was exacted and had to be paid. This three months’ extra pay was a great object to 
consuls in interesting them in the discharge of seamen. 

Regarding the transportation of destitute seamen, the law now provides that any 
consul has the right to send seamen on board any American vessel for transportation 
home. 

Mr. Dingley. What, in substance, is the English law respecting the discharge of 
sailors ? 

Mr. Burtt. They allow the making of a contract for such time and such voyages 
as may meet the interest of both parties, allowing the contract to be made at any 
place and end at any place mutually agreed upon. I would like to state one case 
that occurred in Boston within a few days. An American ship bound to Liverpool 
from Boston shipped a crew of English sailors who belonged in Liverpool. They had 
never signified any intention of being American citizens. On the arrival of the ves¬ 
sel at Liverpool tlie American consul demanded three months’ extra pay from these 
men who had arrived in their own homes, and perhaps might never come back again 
before they could be discharged. The money was paid under protest, and various 
attempts have since been made to recover the amounts from the government, but 
without success. 

Mr. Candler. Has there been difficulty in shipping seamen in San Francisco? 

Mr. Burtt. Not in cases where sailors have paid “ blood money.” 

Mr. Candler. Do you believe that if our law was the same as the English law 
we could ship on the same terms? 


16 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Burtt. There is no question about it. 

The Chairman. Would sailors ship on a vessel of a country that made no provis¬ 
ion with its foreign agents to return them to their homes cheaper and more freely 
than they would on a vessel of a country that they knew provided by law for then 
return, if discharged in a foreign country ? 

Mr. Burtt. Foreign consuls of all nations are always authorized to take care ot 
any destitute seamen. • . 

Mr. Candler. Is not a sailor who ships for a voyage bound to remain by the 
vessel ? 

Mr. Burtt. Yes, but it is almost impossible to hold him. If it was not for the 
advantage of the sailor to be discharged in a foreign port you will do away with a 
great temptation for the sailor to desert if you abolish that clause in our law. 

Mr. Candler. If a sailor goes on a voyage of six months from here to the East 
Indies and leaves the ship he forfeits his whole pay? 

Mr. Burtt. He does by law. 

Mr. Candler. If lie goes in an English ship and leaves her he is paid? 

Mr. Burtt. Yes, sir; it is assumed by consuls iu England, if a sailor deserts he 
has been induced to desert. 

Mr. Cox. What relief do you suppose a modification of this law would give ? 

Mr. Burtt. It would enable us to ship and discharge our seamen, paying them for 
time of service only, and enable us to ship better men. We now have poorly picked 
men. 

The Chairman. This change of law would enable you to get a better crew. Ex¬ 
plain to the committee why it is if the sailor thought lie could get three months’ extra 
pay in a foreign port he would not be induced to ship. 

Mr. Burtt. Norwegians, Italians, and French sailors are shipped for round voy¬ 
age—for a determined time—audit is seldom that any one of these sailors attempts to 
be discharged. They are all at home. It is not often that we get one of these men, 
unless he has a roving disposition, and has no home. The class of men, as a rule, that 
ship in American vessels are entirely different—in many cases they are adventurous, 
and really have no home. We get very good Portuguese sailors. As a rule the men 
who ship in American vessels are not as temperate men, so far as my experience goes, 
as sailors of other foreign countries. We should be enabled to make contracts that 
would be mutually advantageous between the sailor and the ship-owner, and to dis¬ 
charge a man if he wished to end his contract. 

Mr. Cox. What, in your judgment, would be the effect of the repeal of the naviga¬ 
tion laws on our shipping interests? 

Mr. Burtt. So far as allowing the purchase of free ships it would be a serious det¬ 
riment. to the present interests now invested in navigation. 

Mr. Cox. Particularly in your business ? 

Mr. Burtt. Not entirely. 

Mr. Cox. Would the repeal of the navigation laws facilitate your business in any 
way, or hinder it ? 

Mr. Burtt. The repeal of all obnoxious laws would help us. Regarding the repeal 
of all navigation la ws I am hardly prepared to answer. 

Mr. Cox. It would not be for your interest to buy a ship abroad without, any ton¬ 
nage or tariff tax ? 

Mr. Burtt. Not as at present informed. It would be very disastrous to the inter¬ 
ests we now have to have free ships. 

Mr. Cox. Would the repeal of the navigation laws make ships cost more? 

Mr. Burtt. With wooden ships with equal equality, we can compete with all the 
world to-day. 

Mr. Cox. If we had a rebate on the materials that compose a ship, could we build 
our ships as cheaply as other nations? 

Mr. Burtt. In my judgment, we could. 

STATEMENT OF MR. WHITMORE. 

Mr. Parker M. Whitmore, of Bath (Maine) Board of Trade, appeared before 
the committee and stated that if we could selectmen as the English do, i. e., without 
the aid of a commissioner, it would be far preferable, and more advantageous to our 
shipping interests. He thought this system a peculiar hardship. We have,a com¬ 
missioner appointed by the government, and have to go to him, and have to take our 
men there to be shipped, paying an enormous charge for this privilege. The English 
ship picks its sailors where it can best find them. They get the best material, and 
we have to take the remnants. Last year, on one ship, we paid $904 bonus. In 
shipping crews from San Francisco, they give preference to English ships, because 
they get their crews outside of the shipping commissioner. 

The Chairman. How much did you pay landlords before the shipping commission¬ 
ers’ bill was passed ? 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


17 


Mr. Whitmore. I don’t know, but I never paid such prices before as I Lave since, 
if that bill was out of the way we would not pay such great taxes. This system 
brings us into bad repute with seaman. If the law was amended so that we could 
agree with the men in San Francisco to leave the ship there it would be far better 
for us. 

Mr. Cox. What is the effect of the shipping commissioners’ law in New York City ? 

Mr. Whitmore. I don’t know, except there is a good deal of complaint about it. 

Mr. Cox. Do you favor the repeal or the modification of it; and, if so, how? 

Mr. Whitmore. It would be better to repeal it. The law was designed for good, 
but it works very badly. 

Mr. Cox. What would you recommend? 

Mr. Whitmore. I would abolish it altogether, and make contract direct with the 
sailor. It would be a great safety to the shipping interests of the country. 

The Chairman. You speak from the ship-owner’s standpoint. Does not a sailor 
need some protection ? 

Mr. Whitmore. Yes, sir; but they abuse it. 

The Chairman. Are not the ship-owners better able to take care of their interests 
without the shipping commissioner? 

Mr. Whitmore. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Did you ever read the vast amount of testimony in regard to the 
necessity of a shipping commissioner in the port of New York, and the articles which 
have been published in the New York papers, which led to the passage of that ship¬ 
ping commissioner’s bill? 

Mr. Whitmore. A great many people thought that it would work a great revolu¬ 
tion in shipping seamen. They do not say that now. 

The Chairman. Do you know how it has worked here in the city ? 

Mr. Whitmore. The working of the system is wrong. 

The Chairman. Are you aware that the Mew York Board of Trade, and all the in¬ 
stitutions of that character here and in all other cities along the coast, sent their 
urgent recommendations for the passage of this bill, and they never yet have retracted 
tlieir opinion under the working of the law, and they are now committed against its 
repeal ? 

Mr. Whitmore. It works a great evil. You are not allowed to ship men that you 
select yourself. You have to consult the landlord in order to get your men. If they 
say you cannot take any unless you take theirs you cannot do it, and your ship is 
tied up at the wharf. The ship commissioner is interested in the landlord and he 
helps him, and they work together. 

The Chairman. Are you a ship-builder ? 

Mr. Whitmore. No, sir; not exactly. 

Mr. Cox. What would be the effect of the repeal, ot che navigation laws on our 
ship-building and our shipping interests? 

Mr. Whitmore. If repealed there would not be many ships bought, and you could 
not run a vessel or a steamer under the American flag and make any money. 

Mr. Cox. You would advise the repeal of these obnoxious laws? 

Mr. Whitmore. Yes, sir ; repeal these burdens on shipping—give us material free 
of duty, and the Americans can compete with the world. 

Mr. Cox. If these laws were modified would it lead to the repair of these ships 
that we bring under our flag, and would not lead to building ships? 

Mr. Whitmore. No, sir; ship-owning interest is not an attractive interest, and 
only a few persons are engaged in it. 

Mr. Candler. You have been a sea captain? 

Mr. Whitmore. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Candler. The American law does not permit you to discharge a sailor, except 
in a home port ? 

Mr. Whitmore. No, sir. 

Mr. Candler. We are trying to get reasons why an American ship is at such a dis¬ 
advantage in a foreign port" As to the fact that you cannot pay a seaman off nor make 
a contract to discharge him in a foreign port has that any elfect on the sailor? 

Mr. Whitmore. Yes, sir; you cannot make a contract in this country that is bind¬ 
ing in a foreign port. 

Mr. Candler. The English ship-owner can make a contract to discharge a sea¬ 
man in Boston if he ships in Liverpool ? ' 

Ml. Whitmore. He canuot do it without paying three months’ extra pay to the 
consul. 

Mr. Candler. That is one of the great objections seamen have in shipping in Ameri¬ 
can vessels. You indorse the proposition that we should have a law similar to the Eng¬ 
lish law ? 

Mr. Whitmore. Yes, sir; the sailor should be paid what he has earned, and should 
have it when it was agreed upon. The consul gets the three months’ extra pay. The 

067 - 2 



18 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


evil of the law is the construction the consuls put upon it. The consul always errs - 
in hi 8 own favor. 

Mr. Candler. With all the difficulties, you believe it is for the interest of the ship¬ 
owning class to be able to make a contract for the discharge of the seaman wherever 
he may be, and let him go ? 

Mr. Whitmore. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. If a sailor deserts a ship in a foreign port there is no requirement 
for the payment of three months’ extra pay ? 

Mr. Whitmore. No, sir; they cannot exact it, but it is very hard to prove that fact. 

The Chairman. Is there anything to prevent a sailor and captain in arranging that 
he shall leave the ship without paying the three months’ extra pay? 

Mr. Whitmore. No, sir; the captain cannot be a party to it. 

The Chairman. The law is that he shall pay. Suppose you think a little about the 
interest of the sailor. We have heard what the ship-owner’s interest is without re¬ 
gard to what the sailor’s might be. Suppose these associations of ship-owners and 
ship-builders should devote a portion of their time to the interest of the seaman, don’t 
you think more American seamen would engage in it if they had that kind of protection 
and interest? 

Mr. Whitmore. The remuneration is so very small the American would not enter¬ 
tain it. In the Bath Board of Trade there was a suggestion made that a ship may 
take apprentices, one for every three hundred tons, and then the government pay 
one hundred dollars to the ship. At present you cannot get any boys to go. 

The Chairman. Is that an unusual liberality on the part of the ship men that the 
government should pay either their apprentices or their seamen ? 

Mr. Whitmore. It was never a custom of American ships to take apprentices. 
Very few captains will take boys for apprentices. It costs just as much to take a boy 
as a man, and they object on that ground. 

Mr. Candler. You say this three months’extra wages is paid the consul; waa 
not this done in order to prevent the sailor being a burden to the government? 

Mr. Whitmore. Yes, sir; but consuls are sometimes bribed; they are always open 
to trade. 

I would like to correct a statement I made. I was wrong in saying that the En¬ 
glish sailor could be discharged in any port where they saw fit. The ship-owner has 
to give a bond, and if he discharges the sailor he lias "got to pay his passage home. 

STATEMENT OF MR. G. C. GOSS. 

Mr. G. C. Goss, of Bath, Me., appeared before the committee, and stated that the 
Maine Ship-masters and Ship-owners’Association was not represented, and that he ap¬ 
peared before the committee as its representative and president. 

The object of Congress in submitting the questions to be answered by the ship¬ 
owners and ship-builders was no doubt for the purpose of gaining information as to 
the reasons of the decline of American shipping, and how to remedy or restore it to 
something of its former proportions. 

I assume that it is the fixed policy of our government to protect home production 
and home industry. The iron, copper, and wool-growing interests are protected, and 
our cotton and woolen and most of our manufacturing interests are protected by our 
tariff, while the one great national industry in which the whole nation is interested 
has been taxed, hampered, and burdened until our foreign shipping is almost crushed 
out of existence. 

In answering your first question, I will state that we can build the same quality 
of wooden ships in this country as cheaply as in any other country. The Provinces 
build their ships of a cheaper material. Instead of oak and hard pine, they use 
spruce and hard wood to a great extent, and it is my opinion that if there were no 
duties on any material entering into the construction of a ship, we could build our 
first-class ships as cheaply as they build with spruce and hard wood in the Provinces. 

I am not familiar with the construction of iron ships, but believe that we build a better 
iron vessel than they do in England, as we have better iron. Our iron costs more 
than the English iron and our labor is somewhat dearer, but with proper protection 
and the inventive genius of our people, we shall within a few years produce a better 
ship, and at as low a cost as they do in any country. 

In answering the second question, I would say," that the less the cost oft fie vessel 
the less interest and insurance there is to pay. During the time of the great depr s- 
sion in freights, some three years ago, one of our oldest and most prominent ship and 
ship-owning firms said they would not take the gift of the best ship that was ever 
built to be obliged to equip her and pay her running expenses, and it is at such times 
that owners teel the burdens imposed by our government. So when these times of 
depression come we could not do it without a modification of or repeal of existin'* 
navigation laws. ® 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


19 


As to your third query, I would say that the tonnage tax should he modified and 
»o arranged that it should be returned in some way to the ship-owner. The revenue 
our government receives from foreign ships that enter our ports from those countries 
with whom we have reciprocity treaties would not admit of its repeal. As it now exists 
it discriminates against our own ships. This, with the three months’ extra pay and 
consular charges, I beg to refer you to Capt. Jarvis Patten’s views, which are in 
accord with mine. 

The fourth question Captain Patten has answered in a manner which is worthy of 
your consideration. 

In answer to the fifth question, I would say most decidedly that the navigation 
laws should be repealed or modified for the purpose of enabling us to stand on an 
equal footing with other nations with whom we come in competition. 

In answer to the sixth question, I would say that the cost of the fir and pine timber 
of which Norway, Sweden, and Finland, and German ports bordering on the Baltic 
build their vessels, are some $2 per M cheaper than with us; also the spruce, hard¬ 
wood, hackmatack, and soft pine of which the Province ships are built are the same, 
while the oak and hard pine of which our ships are principally built would cost 
those countries the difference of freight, say, $2 per tou for the Provinces and from 
$10 to $15 for European countries. As to the competition, the cost of iron and steel 
entering into the construction of steamers (for we build no iron sailing ships), steam¬ 
ship builders will no doubt answer fully. 

The effect of a rebate on all or any such materials, which is your seventh question, 
would be to place us on an equal footing with other nations, or, which would be better, 
to allow us a bounty on all dutiable materials entering into the construction of a 
ship, so that we would use our home productions, most of which, [iron and yellow 
in particular], are better than the English. 

In answer to your final question, I would say that one of the principal causes was 
the effects of the war. The high rate of insurance on war premiums, the discrimina¬ 
tion between our ships and the rebels’, we being obliged to take freights less-tlie war 
premium, and the high cost of building. 

At the close of the war our shipping had been depleted fully one-third, and the 
duties on materials entering into the const ruction of a ship amounted to $10 per ton. 
This discouraged ship-owners from building ships, and they turned their attention to 
railroads, which had large subsidies (land grants) from the government, and manu¬ 
facturings which were protected by the tariff. 

The remedies to be applied are simple, in my judgment. Place us on an equal foot¬ 
ing with other nations by enabling us to get our material as cheaply as other nations, 
and all laws relating to our commerce so revised and amended that no burden shall be 
imposed that is not borne by other nations. 

Any vessel, whether sail or steam, shall be paid for mail service, as other nations 
pay for same service, without regard to size of vessel. 

Respectfully submitted, 

G. C. GOSS, 

Of Goss, Sawyer Packard , Ship builders, Bath, Maine. 


Mr. Goss submitted his views in writing, and stated in addition that he appeared in 
behalf of the sailor. He thought our system was working very injuriously to the 
sailor, as he was now looked upon as little below the order of a human being. 

Mr. RoBESON. The law considers him so? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; and the law does not furnish that protection which it should, in 
iny judgment. The English law gave a seaman a discharge, and he cannot ship in. 
another English ship unless he has that discharge. This is one reason why we have 
poor sailors. We should elevate the sailor. He is at the mercy of the landlord ; he 
is the tool of the landlord, who ships him just where he pleases, and I think the gov¬ 
ernment should protect him. 

The Chairman. Under the law the landlord cannot get the money at all. The law 
provides that not even his check or draft shall be available to the landlord. 

Mr. Goss. It may be, but that is the fact of the case. Advance wages are paid to 

the sailor. . . . _ . 

Mr. Elwell. (Interrupting.) The shipping commissioner requires a deposit from a 
master shipping a crew. The sailor is supposed to give him a three (lays’ note, which 
is a note due three days after the vessel sails, and on presentation that note is 
brought before the commissioner of the United States. The commissioner has that 
money sometimes from three to ten days. 

Mr. Goss. The sailor when he leaves the port is in debt to the landlord. No consul 
can discharge a seaman without exacting three months’ extra pay. 

Mr. Cox. Give us your judgment as to the utility of this shipping commissioners’ 
act - do you believe the contract should be made directly with the sailor? 

Mr Goss. I think it should conform to the English law; it would elevate the sailor,, 
but as it is it does not; it simply makes the shipping commissioner the shipping 
master. 


20 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


The Chairman. Can a sailor be discharged unless it is a matter of the commis¬ 
sioner’s record, and does not the law say that the commissioner shall keep a certified 
■copy of that record ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. Since this law went into existence, has it answered your expectation ? 

Mr. Goss. I cannot say that it has. We have to go before the United States com¬ 
missioners and we are under their control entirely. / 

Mr. Cox. Are ship-owners opposed to that law ? 

Mr. Goss. I think they are. 

Mr. Robeson. What do you mean by the advance ? 

Mr. Goss. Every sailor that ships lias two months’ advance by authority of the 
bargain between the shipper and the sailor. There is a contract between the person 
shipping the sailor and the man who supplies him. 

Mr. Robeson. The custom is that he shall have two months’ advance, or so much, 
according to the voyage ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. That advance is paid by a note which is in the hands of the ship¬ 
ping commissioner and payable to the order of the sailor, usually three days after the 
ship sails. The practical working of that is that an indorsement is made to the land¬ 
lord who has already accumulated a debt against him for board, and he goes to sea 
without it. That is the statement. How do you propose to remedy it ? 

Mr. Goss. I propose to abolish that advance. The system makes the sailor a slave 
to the landlord. 

The Chairman. Is it not one of the leading objects of the shipping commissioners’ 
bill to free the sailor from this burden? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, in spirit, but experience does not show it. 

The Chairman. You are making random statements. I should like to have some 
gentleman take the law and say what changes are wanted. 

Mr. Goss. The landlords were opposed to a bill that no shipmaster should pay ad¬ 
vance to seamen. 

Mr. Robeson. Do not the sailors go into boarding-houses and get under control of 
the landlords, and being in that condition they are shipped by these landlords, and 
only on their motion and at their own will? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. Then these landlords refuse to ship them unless there shall bo an 
advance made sufficient to cover their debts? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; that is the fact. 

Mr. Robeson. There is no law requiring that advance, but it is merely a custom, 
and the requirements of the landlords who take advantage of the weakness of the 
sailor. 

Mr. Goss. That is precisely it. 

Mr. Robeson. Your first remedy is that there should be au additional law forbidding 
this advance. You are not finding fault with the shipping act in itself, but it does 
not go far enough. 

Mr. Goss. No, sir; it does not cover the evil it was intended to reach. 

Mr. Cox. Are these advantages forced by the shipping commissioner and landlord 
from the sailor ? 

Mr. Goss. These landlords dictate to the ship-owners what advance of the sailors 
they shall have, and what they will furnish these men for. In San Francisco we 
have to pay from one hundred to three hundred dollars to get a man. This is the 
.landlord’s w r ork, w ho dictates the terms. 

Mr. Robeson. Do you have to pay that as bounty? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; besides the advance. 

Mr. Robeson. Who does it go to; is it paid to the shipping commissioner? 

Mr. Goss. No, sir; I never kuew r of any shipping commissioner that would be 
guilty of an act of that kind. It is the landlord who holds the men. 

The Chairman. When it is said that the shipping commissioner, who is appointed 
by the judge of the district or circuit court, gets this advance and works in favor of 
the landlords, by a law intended to protect the sailor and take this “ blood money,” 
I want proof of it. 

Mr. Goss. I do not knovfr about that, but there are men here who can answer that. 
The landlords go to the shipping commissioner and say you shall not have these 
men- 

The Chairman. But the law gives the liberty to the sailor to ship where he 
pleases. 

Mr. Goss. That was the intention of the law. 

Mr. Robeson. There is no law which requires this advance and no law which pre¬ 
vents a sailor himself, if he is free, without physical restraint, from going to a ship¬ 
ping commissioner and ship if he desires, without paying any “blood money.” The 
weakness is not in the act, but in the sailor and his condition. 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


21 


Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. Then the defect is not in tlie law, hut the law is riot sufficiently 
stringent and far-reaching to protect a sailor in his condition from the people who 
surround him. Suppose you should modify the law hy providing that no “ blood 
money” should be paid, making it a criminal offense, what would be the effect of that 
on the shipping of seamen ? 

Mr. Goss. At first it might lead to difficulty in getting men. In San Francisco 
these landlords would say you cannot have these men. They would evade it in some 
way. 

Mr. Robeson. Your idea is that either the law ought to be more stringent or you 
have got to give it this protection. 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; I believe if the shipping commissioner’s contract is repealed, 
and we could make contracts direct with the sailor and the landlord, it would cure the 
difficulty. 

Mr. Dingley. American shipping owners and masters are in competition with 
British ship owners and masters. Is it the custom of British owners and masters in 
San Francisco, for example, to pay advance wages to seamen when shipped ? 

Mr. Goss. I cannot answer that correctly. 

Mr. Dingley. Does not the British law require masters of British vessels to pay a 
sailor the w T hole of his wages ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; that is the law. 

Mr. Dingley. And our law on that point is distinguished from the British law ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir ; and when his account is made up he cannot ship again in an 
English ship unless he produces his discharge. 

Mr. Dingley. And if our law should be amended so as to require payment to dis¬ 
charged seamen of the full wages from the day of shipment to time of discharge, 
would it not help us ? 

Mr. Goss. I don’t think it would help the ship-owner. He is compelled to get his 
men and give money in addition to what the landlord is paid. 

Mr. Dingley. Do English ship-masters pay this advanced wages ? 

Mr. Goss. They do not pay as much ; they do not pay this bounty. 

Mr. Cox. Are you a ship-builder? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. What effect would result to our shipping interests if we were allowed to 
buy ships abroad, or in case ships were brought in under a tariff duty ; what would 
be the effect on ship-building interests? 

Mr. Goss. It would not affect us in building wooden ships. 

Mr. Cox. Can you build as cheap a ship in Maine as they can over the border? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; a ship of the same character. 

Mr. Cox. There is nothing that enters into your ships that would require a rebate? 

Mr. Goss. Yes we could, provided we were untrammelled and every article enter¬ 
ing into the composition were free. 

Mr. Candler. The English law gives a rebate for all ships built for the foreign 
trade? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. Captain Patten makes a statement favoring a rebate on all material 
entering into the composition of ships; what is the advantage of that ? 

Mr. Goss. On all dutiable articles, stores, &c., we want to stand in all respects on 
an equality with other nations. 

Mr. Dingley. When an English ship-master in our port ships a seaman in New 
York, for example, is he obliged to take that man before the shipping commissioner? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; it works a discrimination against our own vessels. Foreign 
ships can get their crews without any trouble. 

Mr. Cox. Is your sliip-building improving in Maine ? 

Mr. Goss. Foreign ship-building is narrowed down in Maine. We are building for 
people in California. 

Mr. Cox. Is not the craft growing? 

Mr. Goss. Yes ; I think it is. For the past two or three years freights have been 
good. We are building several auxiliary steam-power vessels, and we have a propo¬ 
sition from San Francisco tobuild two steamers to go around Cape Horn and through 
the Straits of Magellan. These auxiliary steamers help over hard places, trade- 
winds, and calm belts. We have about lost the trade of Buenos Ayres. We have 
thought the government might aid us and pay us something for carrying the mails 
by these auxiliary steam-power vessels. A letter for Buenos Ayres has to be sent by 
way of England now. The average passage across a calm belt is about sixty days. 

Mr. Robeson. You state w T e have lost the Buenos Ayres trade. Why ? 

Mr. Goss. From the fact that the Norwegians and Italians can sail a vessel cheaper. 

Mr. Robeson. It takes no more actual labor or actual material to build a ship in 
En«■ land or Sweden than it does here. The difference in price is tin* difference in the 
cost of wages? 


22 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; as far as labor is concerned, we build an iron ship nearly as 
cheaply as they can in England. 

Mr. Robeson. We have lost the Bueuos Ayres trade by the fact that they have 
cheaper ships. The foreigners do not feed their sailors, do not pay them as much ; is 
that the reason ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; that is it exactly. 

Mr. Cox. How can you remedy that? 

Mr. Goss. We are going to try to remedy it by auxiliary steam. 

Mr. Vest. Did you state that these Norwegians can build their vessels much 
cheaper than we can build them here ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; they build them in the Provinces in the winter on the ice. 
They do not have to launch them. They build them of Hr and pine. 

Mr. Dingley. Can they build a tirst-class vessel cheaper? 

Mr. Goss. No, sir. 

Mr. Dingley. Quality for quality can we build a wooden vessel as cheaply here as 
anywhere iu the world? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Vest. They can run their vessels cheaper? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; they do not have this three months’ extra pay. We want out¬ 
law so amended that we can stand on an equal footing with other nations. 

Mr. Cox. There is no necessity for having a prohibitory law about buying? 

Mr. Goss. So far as we are concerned, no ; but on the subject of iron ships we need 
protection for a short time ; say, ten years. 

Mr. Candler. If we take off all these extra charges, do you think you could run 
your vessels as cheaply as in foreign countries? As a whole, if you can build an 
American ship as cheaply as they can abroad of the same quality, and all these extra 
•charges appear, we are viitually on the same basis as foreign ships? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. These European ship-masters run their ships cheaper than we do, do 
they rot? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. Why would it not be better for the shipping interests of the coun¬ 
try to stop all American ship-building and employ foreign vessels; would not Ameri¬ 
cans be better oft' for that ? 

Mr. Goss. You can see that an Italian will stick to his ship and eat maccaroni and 
•drink wine rather than go into an American ship. 

Mr. Robeson. Is it not better to ship where you can ship cheapest—in other words, 
for Americans to give up the carrying trade, and let it go where it is done cheaper. 
They have got to do that or else take oft’ some of the burdens of the law, because 
commerce will go where it is cheapest unless there is some interposition of the law. 

Mr. Goss ,The tendency of the age is for steam, and we have to keep pace with 
•other countries. 

Mr. Robeson. Why is it that in building iron ships, with all our facilities, it takes 
no more actual labor to put the two together ? And why is it that English steamships 
run us oft' the South American trade ? Why do they carry our American goods to and 
from South America? 

Mr. Goss. Because we have not had sufficient encouragement to build these 
steamers. 

Mr. Robeson. Have not all those lines in the South American trade been subsi¬ 
dized ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Candler. Do I understand you correctly when you state that we can build 
vessels of the same quality equally as well as in foreign countries ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Candler. If we take oft' these restrictive laws applying to stores, consular fees, 
•&c., could we run our vessels equally as well ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Candler. If the country will relieve you of the burden, and place you on a 
footing with foreign countries, it would not be necessary for us to abandon our ship¬ 
ping trade and pass it over to somebody else? 

Mr, Goss. No, sir; it would not. 

Mr. Candler. Do you think we can build abetter iron or steel ship iu this country 
than they can in England? * 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; we have better iron than they have in England. We can build 
an iron ship here equally as well; we make better plates. 

Mr. Candler. What can we build an iron sailing ship in this country for? 

Mr. Goss. About £10 to the ton. 

Mr. Cox. Is there any such thing as a sailing ship of steel? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; there is a process of making the steel of great tensile strength. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 23 

I think it would reduce the price of steel. The Norway Steel Works of Boston make 
an excellent material. 

Mr. Robeson. The steel ship is better than an iron ship on account of the equal 
rigidity, with lighter weight. 

Mr. Goss. \es, sir ; it has a greater tensile strength. 

Mr. Robeson. Then the reason why a steel ship is better than a wooden ship is be¬ 
cause the wooden ship put to great speed would shake to pieces in a year or two ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. To have great speed an ocean carrying vessel must be built of metals, 
with engines of great power ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir; it is acknowledged that steel or iron is preferable. We cannot 
build a wooden ship of equal strength with equal weight. At the close of the war we 
bad $10 a ton against us. If we could have had raw material free of duty we could 
have built a woodeu ship $10 a ton cheaper than we do now. 

Mr. Dingley. When you refer to the government having aided you, you refer to 
the act ot 187*2, granting a rebate on materials entering into the construction of for¬ 
eign-built vessels? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Candler. I understand that you favor taking off the three months’ wages, and 
haviug our law conform to the English law ? 

Mr. Goss, 4es, sir; precisely. I believe iu«protectingthe seaman just as they do if 
they wish to be discharged. I believe in discharging them. 

Mr. RdfiESON. You think in regard to our law it is an endeavor in the right direc¬ 
tion ; that it is not sufficiently far-reaching ? 

Mr. Goss. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. There is nothing iu the ship commissioners’ bill at all in regard to- 
three months’ extra pay ? 

Mr. Goss. No, sir ; there is no provision of this kind in regard to the ship commis¬ 
sioners’ bill. 

Mr. Robeson moved that the committee continue in session until 3.30 p. m., and 
it was agreed to. 


STATEMENT OF MR. JOHN H. KIMBALL. 

John H. Kimball, of Bath, Me., addressed the committee on the subject of advance 
wages. 

He believed in taking the seaman out of the grasp of the landlords. As long as the 
landlords could extract money from him, he was their slave. If you could relieve the 
sailor from being the possessor of money when he went ashore, it would elevate him 
in every sense. The moment he landed he went to a hoarding-house, and gave his 
money to the landlord, who invariably used it up. The landlord takes him and ships 
him, and he goes to sea in debt from one to three months, according to the voyage, 
and all the time he is dropping down lower and lower in social existence. Not one- 
fifth of the men who go to sea in American bottoms are American born. 

Regarding the three months’ extra pay, the witness stated that he had had a little 
severe experience. He cited the following instances to show the hardships of this 
extra pay question. In 1874 the ship John H. Kimball sailed from Liverpool and ar¬ 
rived at Saint John’s. The crew, all foreigners, wanted to leave the ship. The cap¬ 
tain could not discharge them without the consent of the consul. The crew was will¬ 
ing to waive all claim to. the three months’extra wages (of which their share was two 
months), but the consul refused to discharge them, except on payment to him of one 
month’s extra wages, to be paid into the Treasury of the United States. This amount 
with the consular fees in gold for 14 men was $210.55; premium on gold, 1874, 15 per 
cent., $32.48; total, $249.03. 

The entire crew left for Boston on the day on which they were discharged. The 
ship had to pay $249.03 for the privilege of the consular sanction to a mutual agree¬ 
ment between the master of the ship and his men. 

The bark C. O. Whitmore arrived at Hong-Kong from Cardiff in September, 1876. 
The crew of English and other foreigners trumped up a false charge against the offi¬ 
cers in order to get their discharge and extra wages. 

The consul, D. H. Bailey, refused to hear the master’s defense, and discharged eleven 
men, .each with three months’ extra wages, at a total expense to the ship of $504, and 
consular fees resulting therefrom, $173.94; total, $737.94. 

The same ship proceeded to Ilo Ilo under another master. While there a part of 
the crew mutinied because they were not allowed a holiday, not customary with Ameri¬ 
can ships. The consul orderedthem sent to jail, where the master was compelled to 
leave them, and to pay three months’ extra wages to eight men. As soon as this ship 
had sailed, the men were let out of jail and shipped at once on board other vessels 
hound to the United States, some of them arriving here before the C. O. Whitmore. 


24 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Eight men’s three months’extra pay. $601 75 

Consul’s fees and charges. 192 49 

--$794 24 


Total expense to this ship in one voyage.- 1,532 IS 


The above statement is from the ship’s accounts, and is substantially correct in all 
particulars. 

J. H. KIMBALL. 

Bath, November 11, 1882. 

The Chairman. That was because the crew refused to work, and a complaint was- 
made to the consul that they had mutinied. The captain repaired to the American 
consul, and, under the law, the consul confined them as your captain wished him to- 
do, and he went away without taking these men. They were in jail for mutiny, and 
he went away without taking them, and paid three months’ extra pay to the consul. 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir; and the men got back and arrived in Boston before my 
vessel did. I present this simply as an illustration of the bad effect of the law. 

The Chairman. Would you have the consul refuse to imprison men who had muti¬ 
nied? If the captain had been willing to receive he could have received them and 
gone on. Had there not better be a lav t° compel the captain to receive his crew? 

Mr. Kimball. I do not suppose tnere is any necessity for that. I suppose they 
would always take them. It was not done under direction of the consul. 

The Chairman. You want the law to be so that they might discharge men by per¬ 
mission ? 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Would any law authorizing the crew to leave their vessels be for 
the benefit of American shipping? 

Mr. Kimball. I think that ship-owners should have the same privilege of employ¬ 
ing their labor as people in other vocations do. 

The Chairman. Would you be willing to have repealed all the laws that the 
government has thrown out for the protection of the ship-owners, compelling crews 
to stay with them, and leave it to the voluntary agreement of the captain and 
the crew what those laws that are oppressive should be? 

Mr. Kimball. My proposition was that a repeal of those laws, making the sailor 
a prey to the landlord, would elevate him. 

Mr. Robeson. The law in general provides that no sailor shall be discharged in 
a foreign port without the payment of three months’ extra wages. That is the gen¬ 
eral provision of the law for the benefit of the sailor to prevent his being discharged 
by the ship-master away from home and being made a vagrant in a foreign country. 

Mr. Kimball. That was evidently the intention of the law at that- time, and it 
was a very proper one. 

Mr. Robeson. You think that the lawshould be so modified that when a sailor and 
a ship-master agree to a discharge, the sailor could waive that payment to the laud- 
lord. 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir; when both parties are agreed, it should be waived. 

The Chairman. Then you would leave an obligation on the consul to send an 
American seaman home from a foreign port. This one month’s wages is a fund out of 
which to defray his expenses. It is for the benefit of the sailor, not for the benefit of 
the government. This has been the law since 1792, since which time there have been 
thousands of sailors sent home. 

Mr. Kimball. I take it that they are mostly shipwrecked sailors. 

The Chairman. It is the duty of American consuls, on finding at his port any 
American seaman who is unable to procure his passage home, to send him home at alt 
events. 

Mr. Kimball. That is true, but these cases do not happen. Sailors do not go to a 
consul, but ship on other vessels. 

Mr. Robeson. When sailors are discharged in a foreign port they are very apt to 
spend all their money there. 

Mr. Kimball. They spend it whenever they get it. 

Mr. Robeson. There must be some provision of law to get our sailors home, and 
this provision of law takes one month out this three month’s advance. 

Mr. Kimball. In Bath we have refused boys who desired to ship. They formerly 
went in great abundance. They now find they can do better than sailing in Ameri¬ 
can bottoms. 

The Chairman. Are not the wages that are paid to seamen so small that Ameri¬ 
cans will not engage in it ? 

Mr. Kimball. The truth is that we cau employ foreign sailors at prices that Ameri¬ 
cans will not work for. 

The Chairman. Would you desire such changes of our shipping laws as would 








AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 25 

compel the wages of American seamen to he as small as they are, to Italians and Nor¬ 
wegians ? 

Mr. Kimball. I do not think you could carry such a law into effect. 

The Chairman. Is not that the reason why American sailors will not go in your 
ships, because the wages are too small for their needs or their ambition ? 

Mr. Kimball. Of course the American looks out for number one. They go to sea 
to learn their trade. If Americans ever did come on board ship with the expectation 
of always remaining before the mast, it is an unheard of thing at the present time. 

Mr. Cox. Have not associations changed on shipboard since the law of 1792 was 
passed ? 

Mr. Kimball. Very likely. 

Mr. Dingley. Are not a large proportion of seamen on English vessels foreign born? 

Mr. Kimball. I have had no experience in that direction, but I imagine that they 
ship foreigners just as we do Italians and Norwegians. Norwegians and Danes fur¬ 
nish a great proportion of sailors. We ought to be able to sail our ships just as 
cheaply as England does hers. 

The Chairman. There was a bill introduced and passed at the last Congress taking 
off tonnage dues and relieving vessels from a number of incidental liabilities; does 
that bill go in the proper direction ? 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir; so fai as it goes. 

Mr. Robeson. Are there any other charges to which American shipping is subjected 
in going into ports of our own country to which foreign shipping is not subjected? 

Mr. Kimball. I do not know that there is. 

Mr. Robeson. Are there any harbor charges which are collected from American 
shipping ? 

Mr. Kimball. Nothing, except in connection with the ship commissioners office. 

Mr. Candler. We have to pay light-house dues in foreign countries which we do 
not have to pay here. 

Mr. Dingley. Our tonnage dues cover these. 

Mr. Kimball. Tonnage dues are paid by our ships once every six months for every 
ship engaged in the foreign trade, and foreigners have to pay it in the same way. 
Steamers, however, perhaps, make a dozen trips a year. They only pay it once. 

Mr. Robeson. How often are light house dues paid on the other side? 

Mr. Kimball. Every time a ship goes into port. 

Mr. Robeson. Light-house dues are paid every voyage. That is a discrimination 
in favor of steamers and against the sailing ship. 

Mr. Kimball. They stand on an equality there, because a ship takes one cargo and 
pays light-house dues on that voyage. If she carries more than one cargo a year she 
pays in proportion to the trips she makes. 

Mr. Robeson. You think the whole discrimination is in favor of the steamer instead 
of the sailing vessel? 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. You say, “We ask to be placed on an equality wfth the ship-owners 
of other countries.” You do not mean by that, permission to buy your ships where 
you please abroad and bring them in under our flag? 

Mr. Kimball. If I found it was an advantage to us, I should. 

Mr. Cox. They 1 *ve that privilege in Germany and Norway? 

Mr. Kimball. Yes. 

Mr. Cox. You do not want to be placed on an equality with them in that respect,. 
Would you favor a repeal of the navigation laws looking to that end ? 

Mr. Kimball. Not at present. 

Mr. Cox. In the future ? 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. How would you act in the meanwhile? 

Mr. Kimball. I would rebate duty on every article that goes into the construction 
of a ship, and that would be all that is necessary. By that time there would be no ne¬ 
cessity for going abroad to buy. 

Mr. COX. How would you go to work to give that protection for the building of more 
ships, either of wood or iron? What is the protection you would give? 

Mr. Kimball. I would enact a law that would recommend such a rebate. 

Mr. Cox. If you could buy a ship as cheap abroad would you prefer to make it at 
home at the same price ? . 

Mr. Kimball. I do not see any advantage unless I could sail the ship I bought abroad 
cheaper than the one I could build here. We want to t ake off all these burdens. It 
would be the bestthing that lias yet been done. 

Mr. Cox. You are generally opposed to any repeal of the navigation laws? 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir; so far as relates to free ships. 

Mr. Cox. You would not have foreign-built ships come in at any price. 

Mr. Kimball. I am not committed as to that; when the case comes up I will de¬ 
cide it. 


26 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Robeson. You propose to protect ship-building by repealing the protection on 
.articles which enter into it? 

Mr. Kimball. I would allow a rebate on dutiable articles. 

Mr. Robeson. Your idea is that you will increase the facilities of ship-building by 
repealing, in effect, the tariff on all dutiable articles that enter into it ? 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. 1 think that would be robbing Peter to pay Paul. Do I understand 
you to say that this question enters largely into the question of the cheapness of run¬ 
ning a ship? 

Mr. Kimball. No, sir; only in repairing and refurnishing a ship. 

Mr. Robeson. What do you want protection on ship-building for if you can build 
as cheaply here as elsewhere? 

Mr. Kimball. We want to get to the standpoint we occupied before the war. 

Mr. Robeson. Then it is a question of running your ships? 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. Is it not protection to the running of your ship to repeal these con¬ 
sular fees and these obstacles it is subjected to ? 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. You want a rebate on all supplies of your ship, and you think that 
American industry ought to be protected except in ship-building and ship-running? 

Mr. Kimball, i do not expect it; it encourages the trade. 

Mr. Robeson. Would it not be a square thing now for the interest of the country 
to take money out of the Treasury and subsidize a ship ? 

Mr. Kimball. The moral effect would not be good. 

Mr. Robeson. It is the moral effect you fear. Does not the value of the ship and 
the ship building interest depend on the trade that she carries on? The small per¬ 
centage of the orignal cost of a shiji does not amount to much, does it? 

Mr. Kimball. No, sir. 

Mx. Robeson. England has the great carrying trade of the world, especially with 
all newer nations, with the East Indies and South America. How has she built up 
that carrying trade that makes her wealth? 

Mr. Kimball. By encouraging trade. 

Mr. Robeson. Has she ever established a new line without a subsidy ? 

Mr. Kimball. No, sir; by paying postage which is perhaps equivalent. 

Mr. Robeson. But subsidy is the purest protection in the world. 

Mr. Kimball. It is encouragement. 

Mr. Robeson. If that be true then England is free-trade with regard to her manu¬ 
facturing interests, but purest protection in the world regarding her carrying trade. 

Mr. Kimball. Exactly; and that enables her to sustain her prestige by creating 
markets abroad. 

Mr. Candler. Do you think that we can build wooden ships as cheaply here as 
elsewhere ? 

Mr. Kimball. Well, I base my statement on what I have learned outside. 

Mr. Candler. Do you think we can run ships as cheaply here ? 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir; I think we can. It will reduce the cost of a ship. 

Mr. Candler. If that is the case why can we not compete with foreign ships ? 

Mr. Kimball. I maintain that we can by giving more intelligent service to the 
merchant who wants to ship his goods. In New Orleans years ago an American ship 
would come into port and she would get all the way from one-sixteenth to one-eighth 
more freight than the British ship would because the labor was more intelligent. 

Mr. Candler. If that is the case why cannot we stand a change in the navigation 
laws? Formerly we had merchants who were ship-owners; and if you change the 
navigation laws so that a merchant may have the markets of the world to supply his 
trade would you not be promoting the ship-owning class? Would you encourage the 
'merchants to go into the carrying trade if they could have the markets of the world 
to buy and sell in ? 

Mr. Kimball. That opens up a pretty large field. You have to consider in the first 
place that whatever credit our Navy has been to us it has been in consequence of the 
seamen who have manned that Navy. 

Mr. Candler. My question was, will you promote the carrying trade for the mer¬ 
chants who have invested capital, if they can have the markets of the would to buy 
and sell ships. From long experience the merchants have found that it was one thing 
to own a ship and another thing to sail her, and that buying and importing Virgoes 
was an entirely different business from owning a ship, and that importers went out 
of the business because they found it a burden to them. If you could build ships 
here as cheaply as elsewhere, would you not promote the carrying trade if they could 
buy and sell in foreign markets? 

Mr. Kimball. I think we should be able to furnish all the ships necessary for the 
carrying trade which would not increase simply because the markets of the world 
were open. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


27 


Mr. Candler. Would it, not be an advantage to the world to have more freedom ? 
Mr. Kimball. It does not strike me favorably, and I cannot reconcile it to my ideas. 

STATEMENT OF MR. E. D. BIGELOW. 


E. D. Bigelow, of Baltimore, appeared before the committee on behalf of the indi¬ 
vidual ship-owners’ interests and their liabilities. 

He stated that, as the law now stands, in case all owners are insolvent except one, 
lie is liable to ten times the value of his interest. There is a law that limits the lia¬ 
bility of ship-owners in case of collision to the value of the ship and cargo, but in 
•case of a just debt against the ship for stores, &e., any one owner is liable for the 
whole, and it would seem to be just that the claim should lie against the ship so far 
as concerns individual ownership. 

Mr. Robeson. The owners of the ship are treated as partners? 

Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir. In England a good many of the steamships, now com¬ 
monly called “tramps,” have a limited liability. 

Mr. Robe son. What you want to do as to partnership in ship-owning is to take it 
and put it on a basis different from that in any other business? 

Mr. Bigelow. You can readily see that about the safest business that can be done 
is dealing in ships. In all my experience I have been fortunate in losing very little 
money. Your claim as against the ship is good. I never had to proceed but in one 
instance against an owner, because ho did not pay up. The profits of the business 
are very great. 

The Chairman. For stores and repairs to a ship there is no limit now in the law 
to the liability on the value of the ship? 

Mr. Bigelow. No, sir; the ship and the owners can proceed against any one owner. 

Mr. Robeson. You can proceed either in rem or in personam ? 

Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. Your idea is that the liability should remain against the ship and to 
limit the liability to the owners in their proportionate interests. 

Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. Is there any limitation in cases of collision? 

Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Candler. In the recent collision on Long Island Sound the Stonington was 
sold for $10,000, and the men that lost were only able to collect for the $10,000. 

Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. When there is a collision, do I understand you to say that the partner¬ 
ship owners are not liable because it is not a part of their agreement that there should 
be a collision, and that it is the wrong doing of some individual man, that it is a tort, 
and that the ship-owners should stand exactly as partners in any other business. 

Mr. Bigelow. I think that should be changed. 

Mr. Robeson. Now, state why you desire this change. What reason is there why 
there should be an exception to the general partnership law made in regard to ship¬ 
owning ? 

Mr. Bigelow. If I were to enter into partnership with you I would first inquire as 
to your solvency, &c. I am willing to go into a general partnership withyouon that 
basis. I now go to work and get up a ship and have eight owners in it. Now, after 
that ship is launched either of these eight men go and sell to somebody else, and it 
may be divided up among forty different partners; that is the difficulty. As a dele¬ 
gate of the Baltimore Board of Trade, I want to say that these recommendations have 
been indorsed by our convention and we intrust them to your wisdom. It is a well- 
known fact that the carrying trade is fast going into steam. I have done a large 
amount of sailing business in all ports, as agent for other owners. Our principal busi¬ 
ness in Baltimore is the grain trade, and we find that now the bulk of the business is 
being carried by steam. We cannot compete with the ships of other nations now 
running the West India business. So far as wooden ships are concerned, they are be¬ 
coming less and less every year, and they must soon stop altogether. We cannot take 
any part in the Pacific trade. Without ship-owning there is no use for ship-building. 
We must show to the capitalist who puts money in ship-owning that there is profit in 
it. ldonot see whywe should not buy a ship of any kind wherever we can. I cannot 
see how it is possible that there will be any less iron ships built in this country, if 
we encourage ship-owning as much as possible. We must have all these burdens re¬ 
moved, and we ask to be put on an equal footing with other nations. In Baltimore 
we are thoroughly opposed to subsidies. We had a good American trade there, and 
it seemed a hardship to us that steamships should be put on to run our ships out. 
Subsidies is legislating for the few against the many and does not give equal protec¬ 
tion to all. 

Mr. -Cox. Is that the sentiment of the boards of trade? 

Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. You would favor a repeal of the navigation laws to that extent? 


28 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Does it make any difference to your people whether New York runs 
a line to Brazil or whether it buys a vessel and runs it, whether built abroad or here ? 

Mr. Bigelow. Not a particle. We do not object to New York or Philadelphia 
rivaling ns. As I understand it you are bolstering up one industry against another. 

Mr. Robeson. Then your idea is that all industries should languish by bolstering 
up one? 

Mr. Bigelow. No; I say that the objectionable feature was that they felt it was 
discriminating against them. 

Mr. Rohe,son. And it has substantially wiped out the Baltimore shipping business? 

Mr. Bigelow. To a large extend it has been reduced. 

Mr. Robeson. You say you think you ought to be allowed to buy steamers abroad 
if you want to, because it would be taking off the burden, and you think you would 
encourage American ship-building by buying steamers abroad ? 

Mr. Bigelow. I think it would encourage American ship-owning. 

Mr. Robeson. Would you encourage the price of American labor and build up a 
class of skilled American mechanics by buying iron ships abroad? 

Mr. Bigelow. You well know we have militated against our mechanics here. 

The Chairman. There is a limited market for any of that class of ships? 

Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir; “tramps” are constantly running in the trade. If we 
could own those ships we would like to own them. 

The Chairman. You do not care anything for American labor so long as you can 
be benefited by it. If an American subsidy or mail contract could have been given 
to a Baltimore line, so that Baltimore could have all the benefit of it, the main ob¬ 
jection of the Baltimore Board of Trade would have been removed, I think. Would 
they have objected to have had a line encouraged by Baltimore which would bring 
the South American trade to their own doors? 

Mr. Bigelow. They thought it was discrimination against the many in favor of 
the few. 

Mr. Robeson. Ship-building is the result of skilled labor, which has become skilled 
by practice and employment, and I assume only receives employment from the fact 
that there is a demand for it. That demand does not arise unless its products are 
produced as cheaply here as in other markets. Then if you buy your iron steamers 
in England, because they are cheaper, you would destroy the demand for iron ships 
here, and by that process you would destroy American ship-building, or make no de¬ 
mand for the results of American ship-building, and the enterprise would lauguish. 
If that is destroyed, then we have no skilled American labor in ship-building, and we 
are entirely dependent on foreign labor, and no American skilled mechanics in that 
line can obtain any wages. 

Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir; that’s true. 

Mr. Robeson. That brings up the question whether it is worth while for the owners 
of American property and those interested in American trade to pay the workingmen 
of the country enough to get them an interest, and to make them a safe depositary 
power. 

Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir; that’s about it. 

Mr. Cox. Inasmuch as you find steamships running between American and Eu¬ 
ropean ports, and doing the work of transportation at great cost to our people, and 
the freightage going to Europeans, you would prefer to buy those steamers and have 
that freightage come to us. 

Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. You would help our country as a patriot? 

Mr. Bigelow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Dingley. Suppose Congress should modify our navigation laws this coming 
session so far as to allow an American register to foreign-built steamships, would you 
or any other capitalist in Baltimore buy a steamship or invest a dollar in a British 
built vessel under existing conditions? 

Mr. Bigelow. I would like to investigate that. Under American laws as they exist 
now I don’t believe it would be a good thing, and I believe we would be hampered. 

Mr. Dingley. If no one would buy a ship built abroad, isn’t it wiser to remove all 
obstacles, and thus demonstrate our ability to run them ; is not that the end to com¬ 
mence at ? 

Mr. Bigelow. I am afraid that while we are physicking the patient In 1 will die. 

Mr. Dingley. Over half of the foreign trade in this country to-day isiu'sailing 
vessels; two thirds of these vessels are wooden. We can build to-day a wooden vessel 
as cheaply as any nation in the world, and yet we take less than one-third of the 
foreign carrying trade and cannot run them; is not that a demonstration that there 
is trouble at the other end of the line ? 

Mr. Bigelow. I think we want our laws modified. Wooden ships are fast going 
out of use. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 29 


Mr. Robeson. What is the difference to-day between the cost of an American and 
a. foreign built ship? 

Mr. Bigelow. From ten to fifteen per ceut. France, Belgium, and Germany aro 
able to build steamships and put them under the French flag, officered and manned 
by Frenchmen. 

Mr. Robeson. You say the difference in cost is ten per cent.; would that amount 
<do a great deal in running that ship ? 

Mr. Bigelow. No, sir; that is very small. The most serious difficulty is in run¬ 
ning the ship. 


STATEMENT OF MR. JOSEPH D. POTTS. 

Mr. Joseph D. Potts, of the Philadelphia Maritime Exchange, submitted his 
views to the committee in writing, and in addition was questioned as follows : 

Mr. Candler. Can you state to us the difference in cost between American and 
foreign steamers at the present time ? 

Mr. Potts. It would depend very much upon the class. There are a variety of 
■classes of steamships. 

Mr. Candler. What would be the cost for freight steamers? 

Mr. Potts. On iron freight steamers the difference is very great. About 30 per 
cent. I should think. 

Mr. Candler. What is the difference between steamers running from Philadel¬ 
phia ? 

Mr. Potts. Probably about 15 per cent, on passenger and freight steamers of 
considerable size. The more wood introduced into a ship and the more joiner work 
the less the difference in percentage. 

Mr. Candler. Part of the line running between Philadelphia and Europe is under 
the American flag and part under the English flag; was that because they could build 
steamers cheaper abroad ? 

Mr. Potts. No, sir; because they were owned abroad. The difference is in the cost 
of labor and our tariff. It was a dollar and a half for our American ships and a dol¬ 
lar for Europeau ships. 

Mr. Cox. Are you engaged in steamship building? 

Mr. Potts. Not at all, sir. 

Mr. Cox. Do I understand that your friends are opposed to a rebate on materials? 

Mr. Potts. They think it a very insufficient remedy. 

Mr. Cox. Do you tend toward the French system of bounties? 

Mr. Potts. So far as we are able to judge, it is the only sufficient one. 

Mr. Candler. Mr Bigelow stated that bounties might be allowed to a line of steam¬ 
ers running between New York and Brazil. 

Mr. Potts. Our proposition is to apply to every American steamship. I have 
been for many yeais interested in the coastwise trade, operating on the lakes. I am 
very familiar with the fact of the extraordinary low rates for which grain is carried. 
It is only one and a half cents on wheat from Buffalo to Chicago. 

Mr. Robeson. Is not the cost of transportation of commodities cheaper here than 
anywhere else in the world, under this protective system to American internal and 
coastwise commerce? 

Mr. Potts. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. Are ours more than one-half? 

Mr. Potts. No, sir; ours are not one-half. That is a very misleading way of put¬ 
ting it ; because we vary much with different circumstances. 

Mr. Robeson. Have you ever entered into an investigation as to the value of that 
cheapness to the prosperity of the country, compared to the cost of production to 
others ? 

Mr. Potts. In this particular case the coastwise trade on the coast has been in¬ 
valuable. 

Mr. Robeson. Probably those coasters could be bought cheaper abroad. 

Mr. Potts. On that point I cannot answer you, because there are no foreign builders 
engaged in that occupation. 

Senator Vest. Does that cheapness of transportation come from the fact that for¬ 
eign vessels are excluded from the coasting trade? 

Mr. Potts. No, sir. 

The Chairman. No foreign vessel can load between two coastwise ports. At Erie 
we have for years competed with vessels loading at Duluth or Chicago. It is an 
open, free competition, isn’t it? 

Mr. Potts. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. We have competed successfully with the Canadian trade? 

Mr. Potts. Yes. sir. 

The Chairman. There is nothing to prevent a Canadian vessel from loading in an 
American port and taking her cargo to a Canadian port, is there? 


30 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Potts. No, sir. 

The committee then (at 3.15) adjourned until 10 a. m. to-morrow. 


PRESENTATION OF VIEWS OF A COMMITTEE FROM THE PHILADELPHIA 

MARITIME EXCHANGE 

[Made to the Congressional committee appointed to investigate the causes for the 
decline in American shipping, and to suggest remedies therefor.] 

To the chairman and members of the Joint Congressional Committee appointed to inquire 
into the condition and wants of the ship-building and ship-owning interests: 

Gentlemen : The comprehensive questions presented by your body have been con¬ 
sidered by a committee of the Philadelphia Maritime Exchange, chiefly from the 
standpoint of owners and managers of iron steamships. Several of the members of 
that committee have bad prolonged practical experience in one or more of such rela¬ 
tions, and all opinions and facts which we submit to you will be entitled to whatever 
weight such experience may be held to confer upon them. Certain members of this 
committee have also, in the regular course of business, been for some years interested 
in the purchase of foreign-built iron steamships, and in operating them under other flags 
than the American; so that all comparative results, used as a basis for any opinions 
expressed in this presentation of views, have arisen from, and rest upon, actual 
practice. 

First question. Our country has the requisite raw materials of ore, coal, and wood 
in abundance. The process of transmuting these crude substances into a steamship 
competent to compete with all rivals consists wholly in the application to them of 
human labor assisted by such mechanical aids as mechanical skill has devised. La¬ 
bor sells for more money in the United States than elsewhere. It is doubtless more 
effective and produces a greater daily result, but not sufficiently so, throughout all 
its phases of miner, furnacemau, founder, puddler, roller, plate-maker, machinist, 
and the other vocations concerned in the production of a finished steamship, to per¬ 
mit the delivery of such a ship to any intending purchaser as low in price as it can 
simultaneously be purchased abroad. 

It is known that first-class freight and passenger steamships to be operated in the 
Atlantic trade could, within the last year, be purchased from English builders at 
much lower figures than could be obtained from the lowest American bidder. 

Steamships built exclusively for freight can, it is believed, be now, and could have been 
at any time within the last five years, bought in England for not exceeding two- 
thirds of the lowest possible American figures for like vessels. These differences in 
price arise wholly from differences in the cost of labor. Whether it is the interest of 
the whole country to legislate against this labor, or against any of the industries 
concerned in the manufacture of a steamship, will be considered later. 

Second question. If iron steamships could be built in America as cheaply as they 
can be constructed elsewhere, or if the national laws should be so revised as to entitle- 
foreign-built ships to American registry, and to be imported free of duty, there would 
still be no attractive profit in their operation, and, therefore, no commercial induce¬ 
ment to capitalists to invest in such property. A comparison of the labor expense 
of operating American steamships and English steamships of the same class, in the 
same Atlantic trade, during the last twelve months, shows that for every dollar ex¬ 
pended on the English ship for labor the American ship paid one and a half dollars. 
This comparison would hold good for any period during the last ten years. It would 
represent an annual difference (on a vessel engaged in freight and passenger traffic, 
and capable of carrying 2,000 tons of freight) of about six per centum upon $200,000; 
which latter sum is greater than American builders would charge for such a ship in 
excess of the foreign builders’ price. 

This great difference in cost of operating does not arise from any difference in the 
quantity of labor employed, but wholly from the difference in the rates at which 
it can be hired. 

The American laws require American ships to engage their seamen in American 
ports. The effect of this requirement is that the price commanded by American labor 
on a given ship fixes absolutely the price which must be paid for any foreign labor 
engaged on the same ship. 

There are weighty public grounds for adhering to the policy-of manning American 
ships in American ports; but unless some way be found to overcome the commercial 
disadvantages of this policy, American steamships cannot compete with similar ves¬ 
sels sailing under the flags of countries where labor is sold for a bare subsistence; 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 31 

nor will prudent men invest in property which it would be cheaper to sink than to 
operate. 

The cost of repairs to steamships is also, of course, greater in this country than 
abroad, from the same labor cause which swells the cost of the original construction 
of American ships. Therefore, if foreign-built ships were to be admitted to American 
registry, these repair expenses, unless made abroad, would be an additional prohib¬ 
itory burden to prevent their successful operation. 

Third and fourth questions. We have learned that these questions will be an¬ 
swered exhaustively by representatives from other maritime bodies, and will there¬ 
fore not offer any suggestions of our own in reply thereto. 

Sixth question. We have given in our answer to the first question a better crite¬ 
rion as to the relative cost of building iron steamships in this country and in the 
country which is its chief competitor, than would be furnished by any attempt to 
compare, in itemized detail, the relative prices of labor and material. 

The gross difference in the price of a finished steamship, as determined by the bids of 
leading builders, under the stimulus of a competition, which, on the part of the Amer¬ 
ican builders, was especially eager and bent upon success, will furnish a safer guide 
than any other, as to the real difference in cost of ship-building in the respective 
countries. 

Seventh question. The effect of a rebate of duty on any materials used in build¬ 
ing an iron steamship would doubtless be to prevent the employment for such use of 
similar native materials or of native labor in Iheir production. It would doubtless 
also have the effect of cheapening the original cost of the steamship; but if that is 
the only point to be considered it would be more effectually accomplished by admit¬ 
ting free the finished ship. The teaching of all commercial history, however, would 
be falsified if our own ship-building interest did not perish under the destructive 
competition which could and would then be waged against it. 

Fifth and eighth questions. There is but oue real cause since 1865 for the decline 
of American shipping in the foreign trade, as there is but one effective stimulus for 
its restoration and increase. The palpable cause is that it has not been, and is not 
now. possible to conduct such enterprises profitably. 

The only efficient remedy is the creation of circumstances which will permit the 
prudent and enterprising to entertain a reasonably well-founded hope of ordinary 
business gains, should they embark their means in such ventures. Will such cir¬ 
cumstances create themselves ? Is it a case where the government, which represents 
the general interest, can judiciously do nothing ? The best answer to both these 
queries is the fact that excepting the maintenance of some restrictive and oppressive 
laws which now exist, and which should be repealed, but which have a compara¬ 
tively limited effect upon net earnings, the government has for many years taken 
just this indifferent, uninterested course, and has, as a consequence, watched with 
its idle eyes this once commanding interest steadily and rapidly progress toward 
ultimate extinction. 

To the coastwise marine it has been more considerate, and has flatly forbidden any 
but American built ships to enter it. This was the very extremest measure of pro¬ 
tection, and what has been its effect ? American capital has constantly crowded 
into the construction and operation of coastwise vessels, and they have transported 
American products at prices which have no parallel for cheapness anywhere. 

Numbers of varied industries have been thus created for Americans to pursue; while 
the general public has been furnished with a service, thoroughly efficient, and almost 
fabulously low in price. 

The foreign traffic which now employs and supports such great numbers of foreign- 
built and foreign-manned vessels, is furnished and controlled by Americans. Why 
should they not furnish and control the vessels too? 

It is truthfully declared that no remedy would satisfy which increased the charge 
of ocean carriage. An advance in rates would be a wholly unacceptable prescription, 
and it would be equally unattainable, while foreign-built competitors quoted cheaper 
figures. 

The price of labor, too, cannot be successfully attacked. It would not accord with 
either the general wish or policy of the country to consider any remedy which had 
as its basis the lowering of labor compensation here to anything approaching the 
standard prevailing in Europe. There is palpably therefore no cure within the scope 
or compass of individual or corporate capacity. * 

No sufficient power is lodged anywhere excepting in the national government, and 
the whole question narrows itself to considering in what manner that power can be 
effectively exercised, and whether there are public necessities sufficient to warrant its 
employment. 

What public purposes would be served by achieving a large, rapid, and continuous 
entry into our foreign ocean carrying trade, of iron steamships of modern design and 
capacity, built in American shops, and manned by American officers and seamen ? 

We believe these purposes to be of vital importance, and of the very first order in 
magnitude, and we will briefly enumerate them : 


32 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


First in rank is the question of national safety. Though a lover of peace and jus¬ 
tice, and free from the lust of conquest, this powerful nation has no certain assurance 
of perpetual peace. Nothing will so secure the nearest approach to this assurance 
as the evident possession of largo defensive power. We have the will and the courage 
to tight when there is national peril; but none have been taught by severer lessons 
than ourselves how profound is that political and financial folly which leaves that 
courage and that will untrained, unarmed, and unprepared. We need have little 
fear of successful attack by land. We are always liable, through foreign abuses of 
our citizens or our commerce, to find ourselves drifting into difficulties with nations' 
which could inflict irreparable damage upon us by sea. We are assuredly far more in 
need of a trained naval militia than of a trained militia on land. We can never have 
it except by the creation of a large American merchant service. 

We always need the means of speedily moving our military forces .by sea to wher¬ 
ever they may be needed; we can never have such means, so abundantly and so 
cheaply, as through the existence of a large American merchant marine. We need 
the best and most capable grade of ship-building shops, and the highest grade of 
skilled ship-building workmen, so that an iron navy may spring into existence in any 
emergency, and without requiring the consent or co-operation of any foreign power. 

Such shops can only be maintained by a steady commercial demand for their pro¬ 
ducts, and this demand cannot exist until ship-owning and ship operating by Ameri¬ 
cans becomes commercially profitable. 

The total cost of the remedy, which we shall hereafter suggest, would be unimpor¬ 
tant aud trivial when contrasted with the saving which such thorough preparation 
as we have indicated would effect in preserving us from but a single war. 

Second in importance is national commercial gain. 

The value of our exports and imports in 1856 was $642,000,000,. and 75 per centum 
thereof was carried in American vessels. In 1881 the value had risen to $1,675,000,000, 
but the share carried in American vessels had fallen to 16 per centum. 

The gross earnings from this trade, and from passenger traffic to and from the United 
States by sea, has been computed to have been in 1881, $200,000,000. If our vessels 
had carried the same percentage as in 1856, our citizens would have earned $118,000,000 
more gross money from this traffic than they did. 

If this government had paid $20,000,000 to make possible the earning by its citizens 
of $118,000,000, could the commercial wisdom of its act have been questioned? 

It has annually expended, with the general approval, millions of dollars in improv¬ 
ing harbors, with no other object than to make safe and profitable the industry of its 
citizens. 

It has annually expended, with the general assent, millions of dollars in the con¬ 
struction and maintenance of a navy, and while the manner of this expenditure has 
been frequently criticised, yet the object, which has been to secure the safe conduct 
of the commerce of its citizens, has met with no weighty opposition. 

The city of New York, which is the most potential American opponent of stimulating 
industry through any use of the need and power of taxation, has recently demonstrated 
anew her commercial clear-sightedness and the ready preference of her merchants 
for actual wisdom in practice, even at the sacrifice of what would have been a super¬ 
ficial consistency. We refer to the policy of making the use of the State canals free ; 
which policy New York City conceived, pressed, and has finally enforced. 

All the higher grades of artificial highways are usually supported by a tax upon 
those who use them; but the State of New York has now declared that this direct 
and equitable form of taxation for the use of her canals is sure to drive from her 
borders that great trade in Western produce which, while it yields large profits di¬ 
rectly, is infinitely more important in the control its possession confers over the vast 
volume of all other sorts of traffic. * * 

They have therefore tendered to its canal carriers a bounty, by freeing them from 
all canal tolls, and have imposed upon themselves the taxes needed to permit the 
adoption of this course. No one can doubt that this apparent liberality will be re¬ 
turned to them many fold in their general commercial gains. 

This is not a tariff question. It should be viewed and met without reference to any 
opinions which any of us may hold upon tariff's. It is a specilic national trouble, and 
should be treated by whatever specific national remedies promise a cure. 

If temporary bounties will, better than all else, reach the true seat of the evil and 
restore health, why hesitate to apply them? The same motives should rul^ here 
which have led our national, State, county, and municipal governments to stimulate 
by subscriptions, by gifts, by bounties, and by every form of encouragement the con¬ 
struction of our great, inland transportation, system, until its daring, its magnitude, 
the cheapness of its service, and its wonderful effects upon our general prosperity is 
without a parallel. We have every sort of successful precedent for such a course in 
our own practice in other directions, and in the practice of every other nation whose 
commercial greatness betokens their wisdom. 

We therefore recommend that, in addition to the correction of existing legislation, 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


33 


^vill be asked for by other maritime committees, Congress pass a law embracing 
the following features: & 

First. Continue to limit American registration to American-built ships. 

. Second. Instead of confining national aid, in the case of iron steamships, to exernpt- 
ing foreign ship-building materials from duty, provide the larger and more searching 
remedy hereafter naiped. 

Third. Provide for the payment of certain rates of compensation to all American- 
built iron steamships launched prior to January 1, 1893, the majority interest in 
which is owned by American citizens or by American corporations, and the other 
conditions of which conform to the requirements suggested hereafter. 

Fourth. Such vessels, to become or remain entitled to such payment, should be able 
to carry at least one thousand tons of cargo, their officers should be American citi¬ 
zens, and they should be engaged in the foreign ocean-carrying trade. 

iifth. The payment should be based upon actual commercial service performed, 
and when the service ceases the payment should stop. 

bixth. The payment should be large in the beginning and should be gradually re¬ 
duced from year to year until it ceases altogether. 

Seventh. The unit of service upon which payment to each vessel should be based 
should be each one thousand miles run, rating only the direct distance between 
ports. 

Eighth. The sum to be paid per unit of service should be determined only after 
careful consideration. It may, however, be mentioned that the French Government 
has recently fixed upon figures which would in the first year give a total compensa¬ 
tion somewhat in excess of thirtv cents for each such unit. 

HENRY D. WELSH. 

JOSEPH D. POTTS, 

CLEMENT A. GRISCOM, 

CHAS. H. CRAMP, 

PHILIP FITZPATRICK, 
Committee of the Philadelphia Maritime Exchange. 

Attest: 

Edward R. Sharwood, 

Secretary of Committee. 


FURTHER STATEMENT OF MR. JOHN H. KIMBALL. 

New York, November 17, 1882. 

The committee met at 10.15 a. m.; present, the chairman (Mr. Conger), Senators 
Vest and Miller, and Messrs. Candler, Dingley, Robeson, and Cox. 

Mr. John H. Kimball, of Bath, Me., added a further statement to his remarks of 
yesterday, regarding the relations between the ship-owner and the sailor. The ship¬ 
owner had the interests of the sailor more at heart than any other person. They held 
the relation of employer and employ^. He discouraged the law compelling the ship 
on long voyages to carry a “ slop-chest.” This chest contained clothing and other 
necessaries for the sailor. Previous to the passage of this law the sailor had to pro¬ 
vide his own outfit, and unless he had a decent outfit sufficient for the voyage the 
captain would not take him. The expense of this outfit came out of the wages of the 
sailor—from the advance which he received—and when he went on board ship he was 
out of debt. Now the sailor usually goes on board penniless. The landlord robs him 
of his advance, and he has nothing but the clothes he wears. He thought the present 
law on this point very defective. 

The Chairman. Isn’t it better for the sailor to spend part of his money for clothing 
while on board ship than to have it go to the landlord when he gets back ? 

Mr. Kimball. That depends; you take all encouragement from him and keep him 
on the ragged edge of poverty, without encouraging him to do better. You land him 
without auy money and he is obliged to go to the landlord. There should be a law 
passed to enable seamen to save their money. The seamen also should be protected 
from the landlord. 

The Chairman. You recommend a change of law so that the ship-owner shall not 
carry any clothing or a “slop-chest.” 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir; I recommend the abolition of the law in this respect. 

Mr. Cox. What would be the average cost of a sailor’s outfit; fifty dollars ? 

Mr. Kimball. I can’t tell exactly. 

Mr. Whitmore. (Interrupting.) It varies from fifteen to twenty-five dollars. A 
ship generally la 3 T s in from three to five hundred dollars’ worth of clothing. 

Mr. Cox. (To Mr. Whitmore.) Would you recommend the abolition of this law 

067-3 




34 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Whitmore. I think that Mr. Kimball wanted to show that this system was 
one of the evils we had to contend with. 

The Chairman. Don’t you think it is a very wise provision of the law that a ship 
should carry clothing in cold latitudes ; isn’t it a little for the interest of the sailor 
that the law should require a vessel to carry clothing ? 

Mr. Kimball. I don’t think so. The ship-master charges the sailor twice as much 
as the clothing is worth. He uses up all his money. ’Tis a benefit to the ship-owner 
to carry it. 

The Chairman. Do you recommend a change of law in that respect ? 

Mr. Kimball. Not unless there is some other guard thrown around it. 

Mr. Candler. You wish to prevent the landlord getting the money of the sailor. 
Isn’t it better if you take away the advance wages than carry clothing on hoard 
ship ? 

Mr. Kimball. That is my proposition. 

Mr. Candler. If you abolish advance wages you carry a “slop-chest,” and save 
the sailor the robbery of the landlord. 

Mr. Kimball. I do not object to the “slop-chest,” but I do to the system, for it 
keeps the seaman in arrears for his board and clothing, and works great injury to 
the shipping interests. I would prefer to abolish advance wages and the “slop- 
chest.” It is to the advantage of the ship-owner to have his men well treated, and 
thus get good service out of them. 

Mr. Candler. Then you would abolish advance wages ? 

Mr. Kimball. Yes, sir; that would be the first step. 

The Chairman. What objection is there if a sailor goes to sea and leaves the ad¬ 
vance wages with his family? 

Mr. Kimball. There is no objection. ’Tis a frequent occurrence. There is not one 
in twenty, however, Avho have any families to leave money for. I never had a case 
where a sailor desired to leave anything for his wife and family. Cooks and stew¬ 
ards are not included in this. 

The Chairman. I think the records of the shipping commissioner’s office will show 
how many, if any, have left money for their wives and children. 

Mr. Kimball. That may be; but I am only speaking so far as my knowledge goes* 

FURTHER STATEMENT OF MR. WILLIAM ROGERS. 

Mr. Rogers, of Maine, again addressed the committee on the subject of advance 
wages and “ blood-money.” Mr. Rogers said that when American seamen manned 
our vessels they were a prudent and industrious set of men, who had some object in 
view in going to sea. This advance system of wages arose from the fact that in for¬ 
mer years sailors left this money to their families. Under the present operation of 
the law there are abuses from beginning to end, and from the very necessity of the 
case, because the class of men is so changed from what it was forty years ago ; and 
the same application of the law cannot be carried into effect now. Seamen are fre¬ 
quently brought on board by their landlords drunk, with a suit of clothes not worth 
ten cents. The advance wages and blood-money went into the pockets of the land¬ 
lords, and “ Jack ” was put aboard in whatever condition he might be, whether drunk 
or sober. 

The Chairman. How can that be when the law forbids it? 

Mr. Rogers. They do it, no matter what the law is. I state what is an actual 
fact. 

Mr. Cox. Who is to blame ? 

Mr. Rogers. It is the working of the system that does the mischief. 

Mr. Cox. How would you remedy it? 

Mr. Rogers. Abolish these laws compelling the payment of advance and extra 
wages, and take away from the landlord the opportunity to rob the sailor in every 
direction. When he gets into port he is taken in charge by the land-sharks and when 
he leaves he is no more than a beast of burden. “There are ways that are dark and 
tricks that are vain,” and the system is vicious. I Avill venture to say it is almost an 
exception if a A r essel goes from this port with every man sober. In the sack which 
Jack brings aboard there is generally a bottle of rum. They often get rum on their 
way to the ship, through the influence of the landlord, Avho works through the ship¬ 
ping commission; the latter I do not hold responsible, for I believe in it, put there 
should be some additional safeguard thrown around the law. 

The Chairman. You say the sailors are carried aboard drunk ? 

Mr. Rogers. Yes, sir; nine ships out often. 

The Chairman. You are making very serious statements ; if this is so general it is 
important that ♦•he committee should knoAv how the shipping commissioner allows 
this. 

A Spectator. He does not know it. 

The Chairman. He cannot help knowing it. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


35 

Mr. Rogers. The shipping commissioner is no more to blame for it than yon or I. 
It is not his fault. Men are mustered into his room, and the captain of the ship se¬ 
lects his crew. You will also observe that there are cases of desertion recorded in 
consular offices in foreign ports. That is not the consul’s fault, for the men run 
away. I do not impute anything to the consul on that score, but I do say that in 
all the transactions that have arisen, from the very necessity of the laws as they 
stand on our statute books, these things appear, and the sailor is obliged to desert in 
many cases. Remove these obnoxious laws, and leave the sailor in condition that he 
may stand like a man, and the master will have no incentive to maltreat him. 

There are ports into which a vessel may go, and to my positive knowledge men are 
paid off without any three months’ extra pay. I only tell you these facts do exist, 
and the only remedy, to my mind, is to remove these obstacles, and, I think, you 
will thus make the sailor more of a man, and it would be more advantageous to the 
masters to treat him like a man. It is a necessity for a ship to have clothing, be¬ 
cause there are circumstances when the sailor may be short. 

The Chairman. I wish you would make a statement in writing as to the times and 
places of these abuses and send it to the committee. They would be very glad to 
have such information so as to follow up these cases. 

STATEMENT OF CAPT. B. S. OSBON. 

Capt. B. S. Osbon, editor of the Nautical Gazette, addressed the committee on the 
subject of “blood money.” He decried the practice in unmeasured terms, and stated 
that from five to seven dollars was usually charged for the opportunity for a man to 
ship. This amount was divided between the boarding-house keeper and the ship¬ 
master. The trouble was, we had too much law, and we have no proper application 
of it. The fault was not with the commissioner. Pie stated that only a few weeks ago 
nearly the whole of a ship’s crew went away from New York drunk. What was needed 
was to make a law that would blot out these legalized boarding-houses that rob the 
sailor. Obliterate this sycophancy, or so-called philanthropy that collects money 
broadcast all over the country. Tlie State of New York, and other States, legalize 
this system of robbery which has ruined our American marine. 

The Chairman. State what you mean by “blood money,” and to whom and how 
it is paid. 

Mr. Osbon. “Blood money” is paid for an opportunity to go into a ship, and is 
exacted from the sailor, and is usually divided between the boarding-house master 
and the master of the ship, and in many cases with the owners of the ship. It makes 
a man pay pretty liberally for getting work. He cited the case of his own nephew, 
who went to the ship commissioner’s office to ship, and the name was stricken from 
the books because he would not pay “blood money.” He charged this abuse to the 
district attorney of this district. He stated it was hard enough to get money to 
run a, ship ; and to be obliged to pay nearly a hundred dollars for crews suffering with 
disease was a great injustice and a serious comment on the lawsot the United States. 
These were the plain facts, and he stated that he could give dates and figures where 
the law had been violated by taking “blood money” from sailors in this port, and 
the district attorney from this city had refused to prosecute the men. 

Mr. Cox. What is the remedy ? 

Mr. Osbon. I complain of the law and violation ot the law. My proposition is 
this: These fees collected revert to the Treasury, and the government collects the 
stolen money and keeps it. I object to that. I hat money does not belong to the 
United States. It is robbery, and in direct violation of law. 

There is another thing that is pertinent to this commission. I speak ot the in¬ 
spectors. Mr. Cox did a noble work in getting a law passed regarding the inspection 
of vessels, but where is that law now .’ 1 hey have delayed the appointments to this 

late day. , , 

Mr. Cox. There has been an election, and Judge 1 olger has made no appointments. 
I think the Secretary of the Treasury intends to execute the law in good faith. 

Mr. Osbon. I followed up this law pretty closely. There is a class oi steamers that 
interfere with our going on to the ocean and being successful traders. They are known 
as “ tramps.” It is this misrepresentation of the shipping interest by foreign influence 
that crushes us out. I can furnish data to this committee it it w ill be ot any ser\ ice 

on the “blood money” question. . _ 

The Chairman. These questions about “blood money,” which are violations ot 
law, arise naturally enough in the inquiries that we are making, and any statistics 
you have prepared for your paper we can use. 

Capt. John Codman addressed the committee as follows: 

STATEMENT OF CAPT. JOHN CODMAN. 

Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen: Although I have not seen the text of the joint 


36 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


resolution authorizing the appointment of your committee, it is gratifying to be able 
to infer from the circular I have had the honor to receive from you that you have 
been delegated to consider two separate and distinct questions which Congress has 
heretofore regarded as united. Ship-building is one industry, ship-owning is another. 
It is desirable that our country should have both, but if we cannot have the former, 
you will admit that it is folly "to deprive ourselves of the latter. 

Your first question is: Why cannot this country build iron, steel, or wooden vessels 
as well and as cheaply as they are built in Scotland, England, or other countries? 

Answer. We can and do build wooden vessels as well and as cheaply as vessels of 
good quality are built elsewhere, and cheaper than they can be built in Great Britain. 
It was for this very reason, in days before the era of extensive iron ship-building, 
that England repealed her navigation laws, which were then similar to our own, in 
order that her people might still have their share of the carrying trade, even if they 
could not compete in ship-building, an example that now, when circumstances are 
reversed, we would do well to imitate. In wooden ship-building the proportion of 
cost in material as compared with labor is far greater than in iron ship building. 
The cost of plant is infinitely less, and the cheapness of the wood compensates for 
the difference of labor. Finally, this part of the question may be set at rest by con¬ 
sidering the small demand there is now for wooden ships for the great purposes of 
ocean commerce. 

We cannot build iron and steel vessels as well as they are built elsewhere, partly 
because competition is wanting. We need abundant foreign as well as the extremely 
limited home competition that we have in order to arouse the talent and energy of 
our own ship-builders. 

We cannot build ships as cheaply for reasons that the ship-builders themselves 
assign. Mr. Roach has repeatedly stated that 90 per cent, of the cost of an iron 
steamship is labor, and he has printed a table in one of his pamphlets going to show 
that the cost of labor in this country is double the cost of labor in Scotland. The 
following table, intended as an argument for protection, from a recent number of 
Our Continent, is intended to corroborate his statement in the latter respect. If 
both assumptions were strictly true, your question would be abundantly answered: 

COST OF SHIP-BUILDING IN ENGLAND AND AMERICA. 

“ In a ship-yard, to build an iron ship, thirty-six classes of mechanics are employed, 
and these handle the raw material after it is made into si ape. Let them be divided, 
for brevity sake, into five departments, viz, ship-yard department, with fourteen dif¬ 
ferent grades of employment; steam-engine department, numbering seven grades; 
boiler department, seven ; iron and brass foundry department, four grades each. In 
the first department the highest wages paid goto the shipsmith and the lowest to the 
rivet boys. In the United States the shipsmith receives per week $ 15.95 ; in England, 
$(5.05; the rivet boy here gets $3.30 and abroad, $1.69. In the steam-engine depart¬ 
ment the draughtsman with us receives $19.80 ; in England he has $8.22. A helper in 
this department in this country gets $8.80; in England and in Scotland, $3.87. In the 
boiler department in the United States a fiange turner gets $16.50; the same man 
abroad gets $6.20. A loam molder in the iron foundry here gets $16.50; in England, 
$6.50. Brass molders with us receive $14.30 and in England $6.15. The total 
week’s wages of thirty-six men in England would be $192.60, while in the United 
States their wages would be $406.01. In a ship-yard, in good times, both here and in 
England, which might employ 2,000 men, they would receive in that case with us 
$22,540, and in England or on the Clyde only $10,700.” 

Of the cost of a $500,000 steamship, according to Mr. Roach’s estimate, $450,000 
would be for labor in England. The same labor here would cost $900,000. A mani¬ 
fest absurdity and yet a logical deduction. Both statements are greatly exaggerated, 
while there is truth enough in them to meet your question. I once examined the 
books of Messrs. Denny Sz Co., the builders of the Parthia, Canard’s steamship of 
3,000 tons, at Dumbarton, Scotland. Her cost was about £100,000 ($500,000). 

There was 162,500 days’ work done upon her, in which I do not include the manu¬ 
facture of the iron from the pig, nor the making of the sailcloth, ropes, &c., but given 
the plates, angle iron, canvas, cordage and all other materials as they come from the 
makers’ hands ready to go into the composition of the ship. 

At that time there was about a dollar in gold difference per day between the aver¬ 
age Scotch and the average American wages. Both have since increased, but the 
ratio of difference holds good. Of course on account of our tariff the iron as well as 
all other materials, excepting the wood used, costs considerably more here than in 
Scotland. But that is a matter of comparatively small account. There was only 
about 1,750 tons weight of iron in that ship, and a few dollars difference in its cost is 
a mere bagatelle when merged in $500,000. 

Not considering it at all then, the cost of such a ship if built here would be 
$162,500 more than if built in Scotland, besides which, if the difference in cost of the iron 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


37 


ab initio before it was wrought into plates, boiler iron and angle iron should be taken 
into account, it would amount to a great deal more. But putting* the lowest estimate 
of difference, these figures show that it is more than HO per cent. Vet, in the face of 
his own superabundant calculations, and these more moderate ones, Mr. Roach has 
frequently stated that the difference in the whole cost of building a ship is only ten 
per cent. ! 

1 lie only reply that has been made to this damaging summing* up, is that all the 
difference in the cost of ship-building, excepting about ten per cent., is overcome by 
the superiority of American workmanship, the advantages of American iron, and the 
novel improvements in American machinery. As to the first it is well to bear in 
mind that it comes from a gentleman of Irish birth and raising, and that nearly all 
his employes are Irishmen or Scotchmen, many of them imported from the ship-yards 
of Great Britain. As for the superiority of American machinery, it is well to remem¬ 
ber that in Great Britain there is neither a tariff on American iron or on American 
ideas. If our iron would serve their purpose better than their own, the astute Scots¬ 
men would surely import it, and where, in consequence of the competition among 
themselves, every labor-saving invention is eagerly adopted, we may be sure that no 
false national pride would prevent its introduction, even if it came from the Dela¬ 
ware. 

One curious inconsistency is seen in the complaints of our ship-builders who assert 
that there is only ten per cent, against them, and at the same time deprecate the im¬ 
portation of free ships, the effect of which, as they say, very possibly with truth, 
would be to advance the price in Scotland twenty per cent. If they are correct in 
both premises, manifestly the American ship-builder would have an advantage over 
the Scotsman of ten per cent., and again neither British law nor British pride would 
prevent Englishmen from supplying their necessities in the cheapest market, as they 
now do when they require wooden ships. 

Second. If we had such vessels without cost to us, could they be run by us in com¬ 
petition with those of other countries who build their own vessels and run them with 
their own officers and crews, without a modification or repeal of existing laws? 

Answer. I have to presume that this question is seriously put. When wooden 
sailing ships were the carriers of the world, I have already shown that England so 
feared our competition that she repealed her restrictive navigation laws. We com¬ 
peted with her then in sailing ships under the same domestic disabilities that we 
now bear. 1 am not a ware that our tonnage dues, which are the same as those levied 
on foreign vessels, were less then than now. We were obliged to pay duties on our 
stores and ship chandlery under various tariffs, all of them bad enough, though per¬ 
haps not quite so outrageous as the present imposition. We paid our captains and 
officers higher wages than other nations paid theirs, and we fed our ships’ companies 
better. As to sailors, to the shame of a nation that engaged in a civil war for the 
freedom of Southern negroes, they are white slaves, everywhere bought of landlords 
in our seaports, who sell these chattels for the highest prices they can get to Ameri¬ 
can and foreign vessels alike. So there is no difference there. As to taxation, in 
some States, notably New York anl Massachusetts, we are better off now than we 
have ever been, for these States have passed laws exempting their shipping from 
taxation as personal property. In-England they are not taxed as personal property, 
but their profits come under the income tax, which does not exist with ns. 

Our consular system is disgraceful. It always has been disgraceful, but it is no 
more so now than it ever was. It cannot be otherwise without an application of civil 
service reform, and the payment of consular salaries out of the national treasury in¬ 
stead of out of the pockets of ship-owners. As to port dues and pilotage, embraced in 
the succeeding question, but forming also a part of the answer to this, they are no 
more than foreigners pay. 

Lastly, in the days of wooden sailing ships, when we competed so advantageously 
with England, nobody proposed to give us ships. Like Englishmen, we were obliged 
to buy them. Therein is precisely where all foreigners have the advantage of us now. 
They can buy ships anywhere with their own money; we cannot. The ships would 
certainly be handsome presents if a generous government would give them to us. 
The interest, 6 per cent., and insurance, 7 per cent., on a steamship valued at .$500,000, 
would amount to a saving of $65,000 annually, a sum large enough to pay all her 
port charges, pilotage, &c., at home, and leave a considerable residue for the benefit 
of our consuls abroad. But as this liberal offer is not likely to be made, we will be 
contented to pay our own bills. 

Still it would be desirable to have these petty charges modified. 1 have only in¬ 
tended to show that they are not the main impediments to our success. 

I have demonstrated that we should be the gainers of $65,000 annually on every 
$500,000 ship which some fairy may be supposed to give us. Let us see how much 
we should save if we acquired the ship in England without supernatural aid. 

Such a ship would cost here $650,000. The yearly interest and insurance im the 
excess of $150,000 is 13 per cent. The wear and tear and depreciation on an iron 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


o o 
OO 


steamship is yearly at least 7 per cent. Therefore it would he 7 per cent, on this ex¬ 
cess, making in all ‘20 per cent, on the $150,000, which would be $5:10,000. 

Now, that amount, although less than half of the $65,000 we should gain in your 
supposed case, is still much more than enough in this real case to cover all the extra 
charges to which we are subjected, and of which so much complaint is made. 

Third. What modifications of existing laws or what new laws are required to re¬ 
move discriminations against and burdens upon our shipping and ship-owning inter¬ 
ests, such as customs dues, port dues, consular charges, pilotage, tonnage, and other 
dues, &c. ? 

Answer. I have already considered a part of this question. Please read sections 
4131, 4132, 4133, 4134, 4135, 4142, 4143, 4163, 4165, 4172 of our navigation laws, and 
tell us if in the maritime code of any other nation anything can be found more bar¬ 
barous aud stultifying. What better can be done than to repeal them. 

Fourth. Compare the laws of other countries with our own with a vie w to their 
effect upon our and their shipping and ship-owning interests? 

Answer. To institute a minute comparison would be tedious and superfluous. In 
general, the laws of other countries give freedom to the carrying trade. Ours bind 
it in chains. 

Fifth. Should our navigation laws be repealed or modified; and, if modified, 
wherein and for what purpose ? 

Answer. Yes ; for the good of the whole country they should be absolutely repealed, 
but if ship-building for the coasting trade is still to be protected at the cost of the 
community, they should be merely so modified as to leave that virtually intact. 

Sixth. What is the cost of the component materials of iron, steel, or wooden ves¬ 
sels in other countries and our own ? 

Answer. In general, the freight and duties added to their cost abroad will, with a 
small percentage of profit, indicate their price in this country. 

Seventh. What would be the effect of a rebate on any or all such materials ? 

Answer. It would, if ships were imported free, give the domestic sliip-builder an 
opportunity to compete if lie could, but there is no more reason why there should be 
a rebate on parts of a ship than on a ship herself. Let both be made free. 

, Eighth. Present any other statements connected with the cause of the decline of 
the American foreign carrying trade and what remedies can be applied by legisla¬ 
tion ? ' 

Answer. The sole reason for the decline of our carrying trade is the neglect of our 
government to pursue the same liberal policy that other nations have adopted. No 
farmer can cultivate his ground as cheaply as his neighbor unless he can have his im¬ 
plements of husbandry on as favorable terms. Let him make them if he can. If he 
cannot do so economically, he must buy them or his farm will not be a success. 

Of all propositions for the restoration of our general carrying trade, the subsidy 
. scheme would be the most ineffectual. It never has been adopted by any other nation 
for that purpose. It must be apparent to any unprejudiced mind that while subsidies 
may be needed for mail service, and for mail service only, the subsidized liues tend to 
prevent the business of private merchantmen by their ability to run them off. Sub¬ 
sidies are therefore for individual benefit, and necessarily opposed to the benefit of the 
public. 

The means 1 would propose for the desired object arc the same that I suggested to 
the Congressional committee appointed in 1869, and have steadily adhered to from 
that time. They are as follows: 

1st. The admission to American register of all vessels of over 3,000 tons. 

2d. The admission of all materials to be used in the construction and repairs of 
vessels of over 3,000 tons duty free. 

3d. Exemption from taxation, local and national, on all vessels engaged in the for¬ 
eign trade. 

4th. Permission for all American vessels in the foreign trade to take their stores and 
skipcliaudlery out of bond duty free. 

5th. A general revision of our laws relating to seamen, and also of those regulating 
consular service, so that the charges which now weigh in any degree on American 
shipping at home and in foreign ports may be diminished and made to accord as far 
as possible with those imposed under the English system. 

I have suggested a limited tonnage which will not materially interfere with the 
coasting trade, rather than the admission of ships to be used in the foreign trade ex¬ 
clusively. 

The reason is, that no Americans would wish to own ships whose voyages they 
could not control. If they could not use them when they desired to do so in the 
coasting trade, they would prefer to own them as they own them now, under the 
British flag, because it is more economical, and they are protected by a more efficient 
navy than ours. 

In conclusion, I am sorry to express the opinion that do what Congress will in the 
way of removing our burdens, even to the extent of granting absolute freedom aud 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


39 


copying our navigation laws in all respects after those of England, measures that 
won Id have been eminently successful in the outset, the restoration of our carrying 
trade will be a labor of years. We have lost our prestige and experience; we are no 
longer a maritime nation; our ship-owners have been wearied and disgusted; they 
have gone into other business, forced by their government to abandon their old call¬ 
ing. Our ship-masters, the pride of the ocean in the old packet days, are dead, and 
they have no successors. Congress, by its supine neglect, has all this for which to 
answer. While it has lent a listening ear to bounty and subsidy seekers, intent only 
on personal gain, its committees have never been willing to report a free ship bill, 
nor has the Senate or the House allowed the subject to be otherwise than incidentally 
debated. - J 

1 hese, gentlemen, are sober truths, and I appeal to you now to rectify the errors of 
the past so far as it is in your power. 

JOHN CODMAN. 

In addition to the above Captain Codman was examined orally as follows: 

Mr. Cox. I think the committee will be glad to hear anything in addition to what 
yon have already submitted in writing. 

Mr. Codman. I will speak of the advanced wages and extra pay systems. I fully 
agree with what has been said by Captain Rogers and other gentlemen on these mat¬ 
ters. One point they have not made. The law is not before you. Our consuls abroad 
have the liberty ot construing that law in their own way. Some of them who are 
liberal minded men can construe it so that there is no great hardship to the ship, the 
owner, or the sailor. Others work it out so as to get the whole of it, and a little more, 
too, it they can. The law as I read it means this: That for every American sailor 
coming from an American port, discharged in a foreign port, the captain must pay 
three months’ extra pay, but for every sailor who is not an American, even if taken 
from an American port, there is no such obligation, and if discharged in a foreign 
port no three months extra pay is exacted. I went to Rio de Janeiro once with an 
American steamer. I wanted to put her in the coast trade of Brazil, and I discharged 
all my American crew and shipped a Brazilian crew, and paid the former three months' 
extra pay, before Mr. James Monroe, consul. I took the vessel down to Montevideo 
and sold her and there shipped a crew of Englishmen, and when I arrived there and 
paid my men off, to their satisfaction, they went aboard other ships, and then the 
consul wanted me to pay three months' extra pay besides ; otherwise he would not 
give me a register. I left the port, went aboard an American man-of-war and got 
home. I think this three months’ extra pay business ought to.be expunged alto¬ 
gether. 

Mr. C andler. Would the consul have forced a captain to pay this money? 

Mr. Codman. He would have tried, but I would have gone to sea without a register. 

This landlord system is a great abuse. The landlord goes down on board a ship 
in New York and picks your men out and you have got to go before the commissioner 
and select your men. 

Mr. Cox. Would you abolish the commissioner? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir; I would make contract with the sailor direct. 

Mr. Candler. You would abolish the advance wages ? 

Mr. Codman. I would if we could, but I don’t see how we can do it. It was tried 
in New York years ago, and the ship was kept in the harbor for several weeks. Fi¬ 
nally the landlords conquered them, and they have been on top ever since. 

Mr. Robeson. You suggest that the way to build up the character of the sailor is 
to take him out of tutelage; is that your idea? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir ; precisely. Treat with him the same as you would with 
your servant. Hire them where you can get the best men. 

Mr. Robeson. And the fact that he is under the care of the landlord is one of his 
weaknesses to-day. 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir; it has kept him weak. 

The Chairman. Before the commissioners’ law was passed was not, the control of 
the landlord and “blood money” charged, a growing evil? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir; the time was, when I was a boy, we had true American sail¬ 
ors. We have not any now, strictly speaking. The law used to be that two-thirds 
of your crew should be practical American seamen, and every captain was obliged to 
swear that two-thirds of his crew were Americans, but some of them were not. They 
lied about their nationality. 

Mr. Miller. Do I understand you to advise the repeal of all laws regarding the 
three months’ extra pay, a*nd that the sailor shall be placed on the same footing with 
that ofa private individual ? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir. Formerly my orders were never to pay any advance wages. 

I paid over their money, dollar for dollar what they had earned up to the time of dis¬ 
charge. 

Mr. Miller. Several gentlemen have substantially charged all the evils which come 


40 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


to the sailor to the present laws; is this true ? These laws have nearly all been passed 
with an intention to benefit the sailor, and you think they have been rather an in¬ 
jury than a benefit ? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir; that is true. They failed to do that, and I would advise 
the total repeal of them. I oppose any law which oppresses a man in any way. I 
believe in absolute free trade. 

Mr. Miller. If a sailor of a ship was discharged at a foreign port he would have to 
make his contract before he left? , 

Mr. Codman. I think it would be a proper thing to have the law so amended that 
a consul might discharge a sailor without having three months’ extra pay. 

Mr. Cox. You favor the admission to American registry of all vessels of 3,000 tons; 
why this discrimination ? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir; I suggest a limited tonnage, which will not materially in¬ 
terfere with the coasting trade, rather than the admission of ships to be used in the 
foreign trade exclusively. Americans own ships now under the British flag, and they 
would rather own them under the British flag than the American. They know who 
they are dealing with when they meet consuls of other countries who will not take 
advantage of their positions for gain in the four years allowed them, as our consuls 
would. They would a great deal rather bring their ships to a British consul than an 
American consul. I limit the tonnage to 3,000 tons in order that if we cannot get all 
we ought to get something. 

Mr. Dingley. Then the admission of foreign built vessels to the American register 
would avail nothing ? 

Mr. Codman. Nothing at all. They must also be admitted to the coasting trade 
to be of any use. 

Mr. Dingley. What proportion of these vessels are run under the American flag? 

Mr. Codman. I cannot say. There is a great deal of stock of these foreign steam¬ 
ship companies owned by Americans. In many cases ocean “tramps’’ are owned by 
Americans. 

Mr. Dingley. How arc English laws evaded in that way ? 

Mr. Codman. Very easily. I want to buy a British ship ; I get a good Englishman 
to buy the ship forme. He owns the ship, and he gets me a mortgage upon the ship. 
I pay him, and the ship becomes mine. 

Mr. Candler. What is the cause of the decline of the American carrying trade ? 

Mr. Codman. From the neglect of our government to pursue the liberal policy 
that all other countries have pursued, including China. 

The Chairman. In what respect? 

Mr. Codman. In allowing men to go and get tools intrude where they can get them 
cheapest. 

Mr. Candler. Explain this and the law more in detail; was it not first caused by 
the introduction of steam ? 

Mr. Codman. I go back to the first cause. As early as 1854 the Black Sea was full 
of little iron steamships. There were only a few used before that, and we were able 
to build finer and cheaper ships than England could. When the carrying trade of the 
ocean was confined to wooden sailing ships we were able to build ships cheaper than 
she could, and then we could compete with her. But when things were reversed, 
and labor entered into the question, the difference in the cost of the steamer of 3,000 
tons burthen was about $30,000 against us ; there was 6 per cent, for interest and 7 
per cent, in insurance and 7 percent, in wear and tear. All these charges are consid¬ 
erable, yet they are small in comparison with $30,000 against us in the natural wear 
and tear of a ship. 

Mr. Candler. You think that this proposition of yours to admit ships of over- 
3,000 tons would cure certain abuses? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir. In Germany we had formerly a carrying trade between 
Hamburg and Bremen, and when the iron screw steamship was built the Germans 
went right into the market, and although they had no personnel we had to com¬ 
mand their ships, and they made splendid sailors. The method of Germany has been 
liberty to buy ships in the first place. 

Mr. Candler. How do the Pacific Mail Steamship Company get their machinery ? 

Mr. Codman. They get most of it here ; some of it they import. You can im¬ 
port pieces of a ship, but you cannot import the whole ship. 

Mr. Cox. Do you favor taking off the tariff on all articles that enter into ship 
building ? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir; I think you ought to take off everything—eyen the ship it¬ 
self. 

Mr. Cox. What is the difference between the component parts of the ship and the 
difference between the finished ships? 

Mr. Codman. That is a question I cannot answer. If you give a rebate on mate¬ 
rials you give a rebate on everything that makes up those materials. 

The Chairman. If you give a rebate on iron that does not necessarily imply that 
it is on the iron in completed form for tlie construction of a ship. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


41 


Mr. Codman. Wliat is asked for is a rebate on iron sheets and angled iron, bolts*, 
and everything else that goes to make up a ship. 

Mr. Parker. (Interrupting.) The Secretary of the Treasury has construed that the 
articles themselves must be specifically named. 

Mr. Codman. It means all pieces of the ship, except the ship itself. 

Several Members. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Codman. A great thing is in putting the materials together. However bene¬ 
ficial it would be to have all these little chargse repealed, they are not the principal 
things that cost. If I were going to jump over a fence with another person, and I 
had 56 pounds of iron on my person, I think I would get rid of the iron before 
I jumped. 

The Chairman. Can anything stronger be said in favor of the foreign ship-builder 
than you say in favor of free trade in ships ? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir; there can. By giving the foreign ship-builder a bounty, and 
building the ship the same as the Frenchman does. I would only advocate the use of 
foreign built ships for the foreign carrying trade. A ship of 3,000 tons is very seldom 
employed in the coasting trade, but it is necessary to draw the line somewhere. 

Mr. Dingley. It is necessary for a foreign built vessel to participate in the coast¬ 
ing trade? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir; this is an argument virtually for the use of ships in the for¬ 
eign carrying trade. The Scotch ship-builders build all the ships to-day that the 
ocean requires, and it does not make a cent’s worth of difference to them whether 
they are under the Hag of one country or the other. They will build as many ships- 
as the country wants. It is no advantage to them. You are not putting any money 
in their pocket; Englishmen will go where they will get things cheapest. 

Mr. Robeson. What is the yearly charge of interest and insurance upon capital 
invested in a ship? 

Mr. Codman. Six percent., and then we allow 7 percent, insurance and 7 percent, 
for wear and tear. 

Mr. Robeson. In addition to the admission of foreign ships, in answer to the eighth 
question, you recommend also a subsidy? 

Mr. Codman. No, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. If you exempt any species of property from taxation—local and 
national taxation—is not that in substance taking the amount of rhat taxation out 
of the Treasury ? 

Mr. Codman. Not in this case. In the first place we do not own any ships. We- 
would not rob the Treasury of a cent, and therefore would not take anything away 
from the government. 

Mr. Robeson. Suppose you exempt all ship-builders in the country from taxation,, 
local and national? 

Mr. Codman. I do not know anything about that. I know we do not own any 
ships now. 

Mr. Robeson. I only want to show that perhaps you have skipped over your ordi 
nary habit and have recommended a subsidy. 

Mr. Codman. If you subsidize the present ship-building yards in this country you 
give so much out of the Treasury. 

Mr. Dingley. You don’t mean to say that we do not own any vessels engaged in 
the foreign trade ? 

Mr. Codman. Essentially none—it is very small. The ship-building interest of 
Maine will come into Massachusetts, New York, and other States if Maine does not 
remove taxation from ships as personal property. 

Mr. Cox Will yon make a definition of a subsidy? 

Mr. Codman. It is from the Latin sub and si do. 

Mr. Vest. It is to pay a man for doing something which he does not otherwise con¬ 
sider profitable. When did Great Britain commence to build these iron ships for 
foreign commerce ? 

Mr. Codman. About 1838. In 1853 there were a good many in the Black Sea. 

Mr. Vest. Under our present navigation laws, how many of these iron ships has 
this country ever built ? 

Mr. Codman. I have no account of them, but there has been one iron sailing-ship 
built in the United States, and Ido not know how many iron steamers for foreign 
trade. 

The Chairman. Do you include any what are called subsidies—mail contracts, Arc.? 

Mr. Codman. Of all the English steamers coming to this port, in regular lines, 
there is not one in twenty thus subsidized. 

The Chairman. They are not now, or were not in the beginning ? 

Mr. Codman. The Cunard line was subsidized, the Inman and the \\ liite Star. 
There are more than a dozen other lines that are not subsidized, and never were. 

The Chairman. Are not all passenger lines subsidized? 

Mr. Codman. No; not half or quarter of them. Williams and Gu ion never was; 
they may get ocean postage. 


42 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


» The Chairman. What do they get for that? 

Mr. Codman. A very small sum. 

Mr. Miller. Do not the foreign steamships seek our mails? 

Mr. Codman. Yes; some. They are very glad to get postage, and there is a cer¬ 
tain prestige in having the letters U. S. M. displayed to a steamer. 

Mr. Miller. You think it is not profitable to them to take it ? 

Mr. Codman. It is profitable to a certain extent, but it is very small—nothing that 
goes to build up the carrying trade, however. 

Mr. Robeson. Did not all the lines from England to New York, when regularly 
•established, receive large postal pay ? 

Mr. Codman. The only ones that did are those I mentioned. 

Mr. Robeson. The Collins and Cunard lines? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. Did the White Star receive postal and direct subsidy ? 

Mr. Codman. Only a postal subsidy. 

Mr. Robeson. How about the Inman line ? 

Mr. Codman. A direct subsidy. The Williams and Guion line do not carry the 
mails at all. 

Mr. Cox. Have you ever made a computation of the amount of freightage, fare, 
<&c., paid to these steamers per annum going across the Atlantic? 

Mr. Codman. Various computations have been made, but I think $110,000,000 
would cover it. 

Mr. Dingley. I believe there are about thirty English steamship lines running 
between some ports in England and New York; have not all these been subsidized 
by the English Government except two ? 

Mr. Codman. The lines running from here have—the Anchor, Brazil, and Hull lines. 

Mr. Dingley. Would you be likely to invest money in British-built ships and run 
them under the American flag? 

Mr. Codman. We have lost our prestige and our experience. We have got to begin 
all over again. 

Mr. Robeson. I understand the real difficulty is in the greater cost of the ship on ac¬ 
count of the insurance, interest, and wear and tear and the difference is in the price 
of labor ? 

Mr. Codman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Miller. Do you agree with the statement made public, coming from American 
ship-owners, that the cost of building iron ships in this country is 10 to 15 per cent, 
more than in Scotland ? 

Mr. Codman. It costs a great deal more, according to their own showing. It is 
about thirty per cent. The chief difficulty is the difference in the cost of building. 

Mr. Miller. How about sailors’ wages ? 

Mr. Codman. If we could get rid of this infernal commissioner business, I should 
think the advance-wages system could be abolished. 

Mr. Cox. Suppose we abolish all these various burdens on ship and shipping inter- 
•ests and make a rebate, limit the liability of the ship-owners, then you think if we 
take off all these burdens we still cannot revive our shipping and shipping interests ? 

Mr. Codman. I am sure we could not do it. Even if the shipping interest got all 
they asked it would be a long time before the revival would come. Abolish all laws 
which prevent our buying ships as cheaply as others, and sailing them as cheaply as 
possible and wherever possible. Uuless you take off every fetter, make us as free as 
China, such relief will never come. 

Mr. Cox. What do you mean by saying the coastwise trade is a monopoly ? 

Mr. Codman. It is protected as no other interest in the country is protected. 

Mr. Cox. Is not our transportation greater than any other nation in the world ? 

Mr. Codman. Yes; bemuse our cargoes are greater. 

Mr. Robeson. Please tell me what would be the cost of an iron steamer, say, two 
thousand tons, with an East India outfit, in Scotland ? 

Mr. Codman. The steamer Batavia cost $400,000, but this was a fine passenger 
ship, but a ship with ordinary accommodations would cost about $340,000. 

Mr. Robeson. What would be the cost of an iron sailing ship ? 

Mr. Codman. About $65 a ton. I cannot give it to you accurately, wages are con¬ 
stantly changing ; that is my impression, however. 

Mr. Dingley. What is the cost of a freight steamer in England? 

Mr. Codman. I cannot tell you that now. It is a great deal less than that, how- 
•ever. 

STATEMENT OF CAPT. DANIEL TRACY. 

Capt. Daniel Tracy, of Vineland, N. .1., superintendent of Sailors’ Home in Phila¬ 
delphia, appeared before the committee in regard to sailors’ wages. 

Mr. Candler. I should like to ask three or four questions to show what Captain 
Tracy’s experience has been. You have been a sailor? 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


43 


Captain Tracy. Yes, sir ; I was twelve years at sea. 

Mr. Candler. You have been a shipping-master? 

Captain Tracy. Yes, sir; I shipped 15,000 men. 

Mr. Candler. After you were a shipping-master did you have charge of the Sailors’ 
Home at Boston ? 

Captain Tracy. I did. 

Mr. Candler. You are familiar with the shipment of sailors; the advance pay to 
sailors ? 

Captain Tracy. Yes, sir; I was first at the Sailors’ Home in this city live years. 

I then had under my supervision *20,000 men. I have been superintendent of the 
Sailors' Home in Philadelphia, and I have had under my care about 42,000 sailors 
there. 

Mr. Candler. I presented a bill in the last Congress for the relief of and freedom 
of seamen in the marine service by changing the system of advanced wages. Please 
give your opinion to the committee as to the evils of wages, and whereby you think 
the law can be changed to benefit both parties? 

The Chairman. Will you state the substance of the law for advanced wages and 
the reasons for it ? 

Captain Tracy. You are all familiar with the law under which these advanced 
wages are paid. I need not employ your time discussing that. As for the evils that 
come from the payment of these advanced wages—the way to remedy these evils—I 
am at home. The evils of giving advanced wages are so multitudinous it is almost 
impossible to enumerate them. It is an injustice to the ship, to which she ought not 
•to be subjected, and it is demoralizing to the men to pay these advanced wages. You 
make them a prey to those who live on their weakness and credulity. There is no 
relief to their slavery unless this system is entirely broken up. For the past twenty- 
seven years I have tried to uproot it. I have given it a great deal of study. I heard 
an opinion expressed that there was some doubt about this being a proper matter of 
legislation. It certainly is a case within the scope of Congress alone. I drafted this 
bill (H. R. 4316) myself. It is plain, and it can be understood. The passage of this 
bilk in my judgment, with perhaps one or two amendments, will relieve commerce 
wonderfully. 

Mr. Cox. What is the wrong you propose to remedy by that bill? 

Captain Tracy. Our seamen will become freemen. Now you make him go wher¬ 
ever and whenever these masters order him. You destroy his manhood. If a master 
sees fit to deduct wages; he should not deduct from the sailor’s wages. You should 
allow masters and sailors to make a bargain to suit themselves, and not have the gov¬ 
ernment interfere and say you cannot ship a man in New York and discharge him in 
Liverpool. There is a motive for these men to be driven out of the ship in Liverpool, 
because they have a hundred dollars and there is a pass given them, and they are- 
made to run away. To meet that allow every sailor to be discharged wherever the 
ship is. This will relieve a good many difficulties. 

The Chairman. Would you propose to have a law forbidding the pay of advanced 
wages ? 

Captain Tracy. No. sir. 

The Chairman. Then you would propose nothing except what exists now, either 
in law or in practice? 

Captain Tracy. I would make it so that if a master of a ship make any advance 
it should come as a present and not as wages. 

The Chairman. If five per cent, of the sailors who are married desired to leave a 
little money with their wives, you would have it so that they could not receive it in 
any way except as a present. 

Captain Tracy. No, sir, not until it was earned. 

The Chairman. In ordinary occupations is there any law preventing any man from 
goin^, and getting an advance if he wished to take care of his children ? 

Captain Tracy. Not that I know of. 

The Chairman. There is no great inhumanity in that, is there? 

Captain Tracy. No, sir. * 

The Chairman. In regions on the New England coast are there many sailors who 
go out in foreign trade leaving families? 

Captain Tracy. I don’t know but very few men that go in foreign vessels that 
have anybody to leave behind, for we have no American seamen; their home is on 
the other side of the Atlantic. 

Mr. Dingley. What would be the effect of the abolishment or prohibition by penalty 
of the payment of advanced wages in obtaining seamen for American vessels? 

Captaiii Tracy. It would be very embarrassing for the American ship, and very 
favorable for the English ship. 

Mr. Dingley. Do you know what the general law is respecting advanced wages? 


i 


44 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Captain Tracy. Yes, sir; the English law prohibits giving a note, and putting 
money in the hands of land-sharks. * 

Mr. Dingley. It is not illegal in England to give seamen advanced notes ? 

The Chairman. What is “ blood money ? ” 

Captain Tracy. It is what is collected from the sailor for chance to ship, except in 
San Francisco where the ship pays it. In all other parts the sailor pays it. 

The Chairman. That is a voluntary transaction between sailor and owner. Would 
you ask for a repeal of the law prohibiting that ? 

Captain Tracy. If there was no advanced pay there would be no blood money, be¬ 
cause the latter comes out of the former. 

The Chairman. What compulsion is there to make a sailor pay that $10 ? 

Captain Tracy. There is no legal reason, and there is no legal redress. 

The Chairman. Suppose a sailor goes without paying, how can the landlord get it? 

Captain Tracy. He has the advance wages? 

The Chairman. Is there not some one to tell the sailor his rights? 

Captain Tracy. There is not a sailor who is not in combination with these infamous 
sailor landlords all over the country. 

The Chairman. Has that always been so ? 

Captain Tracy. No, sir; it arose during the war, when they obtained from the 
States legislatures an act incorporating humane societies. Sailors in every port were 
pledged to join those associations, or they would close their doors against them. 

The Chairman. You are the only one of all these benevolent people remaining ? 

Captain Tracy. I have the backing of all seamen societies in every port where I 
have worked. 

The Chairman. With all these influences and aid societies you could not prevent 
the Sailors’ Home being the tool of the landlord ? 

Captain Tracy. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Then these moral influences failed to accomplish the good you de¬ 
sired ? 

Captain Tracy. Yes, sir; the landlord dictates what men shall be taken, and unless 
a sailor stays in these association houses he is not allowed to ship. 

The Chairman. You had 42,000 men in your Sailors’ Home—what became of these 
42,000 men? 

Captain Tracy. That was in 1858, when there were no embarrassments. 

The Chairman. Is there any law anywhere, State or national, giving a landlord 
any control over a sailor’s movements? 

Captain Tracy. There is no law that needs repealing. 

The Chairman. Is there any power in Congress that forbids a sailor from shipping 
on board any vessel he desires to ? 

Captain Tracy. No, sir ; provided he pays his “ blood money.” The landlord some¬ 
times keeps his traps, and he goes on board with just what he stands in ; otherwise 
he is perfectly free to go. 

The Chairman. Is there anything to prevent any sailor from shipping ? 

Captain Tracy. Yes, sir; they are “shanghaied.” Even United States soldiers 4 
merchants, and professional men have disappeared mysteriously, and it was found 
that they had been “shanghaied” and carried off in English vessels, and all this be¬ 
cause advanced wages could be drawn. 

The Chairman. You say there would be none of this “shanghaiing” except for 
this advanced wages, which arises from giving a note after the vessel has left, and 
that professional men are “shanghaied ” or taken aboard a vessel? 

Captain Tracy. Yes, sir; they know nothing about it, and they are either intox¬ 
icated or drugged, their due-bills are forged, and their money drawn. Their name is 
forged by the person “shanghaiing” them. 1 have known a master of an English 
steamer “shanghaied” when perfectly sober. 

Mr. Candler. You agree with the other gentlemen in doing away with advanced 
wages and three month’s extra pay ? 

Captain Tracy. Yes, sir, I do. In 1857 the American Chamber of Commerce, 
niofed by the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce, held a meeting and talked this mat¬ 
ter over and recommended its abolishment, and there were 157 merchants in New 
York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, who signed an agreement that on ships under 
our control they would not give any advance after July, 1877. All these merchants, 
some 200 in number, were compelled to back down in one week. 

The Chairman. If this bill you propose is enacted into a law would not this same 
trouble remain with the laudlord? Explain how you would avoid that influence? 

Captain Tracy. If the sailor had no advance, when he wants pay he should have 
it when he left the ship. He is allowed to go into a boarding-house as we would go 
into a hotel. His freedom should be given him, and he should be allowed to ship at 
will. 


Merchant’s shipping acts, page 289. 




AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


45 


STATEMENT OF MR. JAMES PARKER. 

[Office of the American Shipmasters’ Association, No. :17 William street.] 

New York, August 18, 1882. 

Hon. Samuel S. Cox, 

Secretary Joint Committee on Shipping, Je. ; * 

Sir : As one of the originators of the petition for the appointment of your com¬ 
mittee, the undersigned feels warranted in replying to the published questions ad¬ 
dressed by the committee, as follows, viz : 

Question 1. Why cannot this country build iron, steel, or wooden vessels as well 
and as cheaply as they are built in Scotland, England, or other countries? 

Mr. Parker. Vessels of all kinds can be and are as well built in this country as in 
other countries, and better, inasmuch as our iron, steel, and wood are of better 
quality and our workmanship equally good. They cannot be built as cheaply, be¬ 
cause our tariff so much enhances the cost of everything in the way of materials used 
and labor employed. 

It is the avowed purpose of those who favor the doctrine of “protection” (so called) 
to accomplish this very result. The advocates of a protective tariff urge that its im¬ 
mediate effect will be to give the American laborer higher wages than are paid abroad 
for the same services. 

Nature’s God has filled our land with forests of suitable woods and our hills with 
the best ores, whence they can be procured at little cost for raw materials; but in¬ 
asmuch as everything the laborer needs—thanks to the beneficent protective system— 
for himself and his family costs more in the United States than in other countries, 
of course his labor must bring him in more wages ; and inasmuch as every addition 
to the cost of the lumber and the ore, from the time the ax is first laid to the root of 
the tree and the pick strikes the ore, until it is placed upon and in building the 
ship, and until she floats upon the water, consists solely of the cost of labor, in one 
form or another, one can readily see why ships cannot be built as cheaply in this 
country as in others. 

Question 2. If we had such vessels without cost to us, could they be run by us in 
competition with those of other countries, who build their own vessels and run them 
with their own officers and crews, without a modification or repeal of existing laws? 

Mr. Parker. In my opinion they could be. In fact they are, and have been, since 
the war closed, so run. 

The steamship line run from this port to Havana and Mexico by Messrs. F. Alex*- 
andre tfc Sons, that of Messrs. J. E. Ward & Co. to Havana, the Pacific Mail line to 
China, and the numerous sailing vessels trading in competition with foreign vessels 
to various parts of the world, are instances in proof. 

The Alexandre line was begun some years ago, out of the profits Captain Alexandre 
had made in sailing, first, a brig, of which he was master and owner; then other sailing 
vessels in a line; then small wooden steamers; then larger ones ; and, finally, Ameri¬ 
can-built iron steamships, as good as are built in any country. 

The Ward line began in about the same manner and with the same result. 

These owners have been industrious and thrifty, though sparing no needed expense 
to make their vessels safe, comfortable, elegant in their appointments and cuisine, and 
popular. They deserved success, and have accomplished it. 

Messrs. Chapman and Flint, our largest wooden ship-owners, began life as workmen 
in a ship-yard. After a while they prospered, and began about the close of the war 
to build ships on their own account. In the past fifteen years or so they jointly built 
one ship a year. A couple of years ago they separated, and have since each built one 
every year. It is a notorious fact that their ships have always been more expensively 
built than others of like tonnage built in other yards (Bath^ Me.) that year. 

"They now own fifteen or twenty vessels, and these all make money. 

It will be noted that these instances are those of persons who have achieved their 
success since the war, i. e., during the period of our greatest depression of ship build¬ 
ing and owning. 

There are many hundreds of American ships and barks sailing in all foreign trades; 
and, I presume, making money for their owners, for I have too high an opinion of the 
thrifty character of my countrymen to permit me to believe that they would sail 
ships for years at a loss merely for the fun or honor of so doing. 

Nevertheless it is undeniably true that during all these years our shipping has 
been growing “small by degrees and beautifully less,” until we now present in that 
behalf, before the world, a sorry contrast to our former greatness. 

I attribute this to the fact that our tariff has so stimulated other enterprises that 
have paid better that our citizens, as a rule, have preferred to invest their capital 
otherwise than in skipping. 

Why should one be content with a return of six to ten per cent, upon an invest- 


46 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


ment in a ship, when he can put his money into Bessemer steel works that pay as, it is 
said, that branch of manufacturing does pay? I have just had a conversation with a 
gentleman, once a large ship-owner, who bad just sold one of his two remaining ships. 
He says that he has made money right along with his vessels ; but such are the annoy¬ 
ances of American ship-owning that, coupled with the fact that he has an interest in 
iron manufacturing, which has for years paid him 30 per cent, per annum, he don’t 
care to own ships any longer. 

We have gotten out of the way of owning ships, and need to have our faces turned 
about. 

There are laws which create these annoyances above referred to, and burdens, 
which can very well be repealed, and the repeal of which will tend to revive our 
shipping ; and this brings me to 

Question 3. What modifications of existing laws, or what new laws are required to 
remove discriminations against and burdens upon our shipping and ship-owning in¬ 
terests, such as customs dues, port dues, customs charges, pilotage and other dues, &c. ? 

Mr. Parker. The present theory of federal taxation is that the people are to be 
taxed in such manner as to foster American industry; but here is an American indus¬ 
try, shipping, which is taxed upon the opposite theory, viz, every tax burden laid 
upon it, it alone must bear. It is taxed to its destruction. 

OUR TONNAGE DUES. 

1st. These are enormously in excess of what they should be. Why should our ship 
of 2,000 tons be compelled to pay $600 per annum (30 cents per ton) for the privilege 
of sailing the ocean under our flag ? 

One cent per ton would amply suffice to pay all the registry expenses. 

CONSULAR FEES AND CHARGES. 

2d. There is no reason why American ship-owners should be called upon to pay 
these fees to the amount (according to Mr. Hewitt) of $122,000 (but, if I can believe the 
stories of unlawful exactions told me by shipmasters, to a much larger amount, in 
truth). This change seems a small one, but it is a vexatious, and, in many instances, 
a burdensome one. 

Surely the people of this great country, with a revenue so redundant that our in¬ 
genuity is now taxed to know how to reduce it or to dispose of it, can afford to dis¬ 
pense with all the fees taken to support our consular system, and all of which, to the 
amount of $843,066, are a charge upon commerce—restrictive of trade with us, and 
consequently restrictive of carrying to and by us. 

3d. The law requiring ship-owners to pay three months’ extra wages to any sailor 
discharged in a foreign port. 

Of one thing the committee may rest assured, viz, good sailor men are everywhere 
in demand. No master will discharge his men in a foreign port if they are good men. 
While the ship is lying idle the crew may not be paid, or may be paid lower wages. 
That is the case everywhere, not only with seamen, but other employes. 

When you and I shat up our houses and go away for the summer, we discharge our 
servants, unless, indeed, we choose to continue paying the wages of a worthy one 
whom we wish to keep. It would be a ridiculous law, and no legislator has ever had 
the temerity to propose one, which should require us, under such circumstances, to 
pay the discharged servants three months, or any amount, however small, of wages. 

Manufacturers shut up their factories and discharge their hands at their will, 
and beyond the wages of the current week or month they are under no pecuniary 
liability whatever to their workmen. There is no reason why a ship-owner should 
be put in any different case. There is a necessity laid upon him, that rests upon no 
one else, in regard to keeping bis men while abroad. He cannot get his ship home 
without men. If seamen are discharged in a port where ships are plenty there will 
be no difficulty in their finding employment; if in a port where seamen are few, each 
master must have an eye to securing his crew against the time when he will need 
them. 

This law, and that next to be noticed, are direct encouragements to lazy or dissat¬ 
isfied seamen, since they know that if They so shape their conduct that the master 
will discharge them they are sure of the three months’ wages and free transportation to 
the United States. Very few voyages to the United States »take longer than three 
months; and why should such men do all the hard work that the sailor’s duty re¬ 
quires, when the same result, viz, three months’ wages and a passage home, can be 
accomplished without work? 

4th. The law requiring ship-owners to carry disabled seamen to the United States 
for $10 should be repealed. Sick and disabled citizens may well be cared for and 
sent home at the national expense; in which case the nation should expect to pay a 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


47 


fair remuneration to the carrier. The amount now allowed is neither just to him 
nor conducive to good treatment of the one sent. If I force a hoarding-house keeper 
to take a boarder for a sura which will not pay for his food the former will naturally, 
and rightly, feel outraged, and that boarder will not receive very good treatment. 

5th. The present law requiring the mails to be carried at sea for the postages should 
be changed. Whether a mail route, either at sea or ashore, should or not be estab¬ 
lished, is a mere question of administrative judgment; but when established, the 
government should expect to pay sufficient to enable the carrier of the mails to per¬ 
form the service and live. 

There is absolutely no reason for any difference of treatment, whether the route is- 
at sea or on shore. 


PORT DUES—PILOTAGE. 

These are local dues, charged under State and municipal laws, and affect all ves¬ 
sels, home or foreign, alike. The desire to secure commerce in rivalry with other 
ports will suffice to keep them within reasonable bounds. Interference by national 
legislation, is neither desirable, nor likely to be beneficial. 

Question 4. Compare laws of other countries with our own, with a view to their 
effect upon our and their shipping and ship-owning interests. 

Mr. Parker. It is an axiom, that “ like causes produce like effects.” 

It has been for years the aim of Germany to foster the increase of her shipping. 
Recognizing the fact that those nations are most powerful and useful in the world 
which possess most shipping, Germany has spared no pains to encourage the growth 
of her merchant marine; she has repealed all restrictive laws of whatever nature 
connected with its acquisition. The German is free to buy his ship wherever he 
chooses. 

The result has been that, while we, with our enormous extent of coasts, have seen 
our shipping dwindle away, we have seen the Germans increase theirs very rapidly. 
Once a German flag in foreign ports was a curiosity, while ours was universally to 
be seen. Now the situation is reversed; ours is the curiosity, and the German uni¬ 
versally seen. 

The Germans have several steam lines from Hamburg, Bremen, and Stettin to United 
States ports; lines to Aspinwall, to Brazil, to India; and their sailing vessels go every¬ 
where. 

The Japanese for centuries acted upon the principle that nothing from abroad was 
to be permitted; but in the last thirty years they have acted upon a different and 
common-sense view. They now have one company—the Mitsi-Bischu Mail Steamship 
Company—which owns sixty ocean steamers ; and there is a serio-comic rumor abroad 
that the merchants of that country (which only thirty years ago the Navy of the 
United States, under Commodore M. C. Perry, persuaded out of the barbarous belief 
that a nation had a right by restrictive laws to shut itself up within its own bound¬ 
aries, and was sure to get rich by trading exclusively with itself), now contemplate 
starting a line of ocean steamships in competition with the Pacific Mail Steamship 
Company—the only American line of steamships trading foreign—on the Pacific 
Ocean. 

All this is the result of freedom to buy the tools of the carrying trade, viz, steam¬ 
ships and other ships, wherever they can be bought cheapest. 

If those nations can (as they have) build up their merchant marine by this means, 
surely the same result will follow for us, if we can be allowed to use the same means. 

Question 5. Should our navigation laws be repealed or modified, and if modified 
wherein and for what purpose ? 

Mr. Parker. Yes. They are relics of a past age; as much so as the fugitive slave 
law, and the alien and sedition laws. They do not accomplish the purpose, but 
rather the precise opposite of the purpose, for which they were passed; and to them 
should be applied the maxim of the law. “ Cessantc ratione legis , cessat ipsa lex” 

Question 6. What is the cost of the component materials of iron, steel, or wooden 
vessels in other countries and our own ? 

Mr. Parker. This question hardly admits of definite answer, because under the law 
of supply and demand, the prices of such materials differ at different times. If our 
protective tariff friends are right, the relative cost should differ precisely by the 
amount of the tariff rates; being that much dearer in the United States than abroad. 

Question 7. What would be the effect of the rebate on any or all such materials? 

Mr. Parker. Manifestly the effect would be to bring our builders and foreign 
builders upon an equality as to the cost of their materials; and to leave our builders 
free to use materials of home or foreign production, as they might choose. 

Question 8. Present any other statements connected with the cause of the decline 
of the American foreign carrying trade; and what remedies can be applied by legis- 

Mr. Parker. It is hardly worthwhile to speculate upon the causes of the decline of 


48 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


our shipping. We can only recognize the fact and endeavor to apply the remedies j 
and this brings me to the last part of the question : 

“ What remedies can be applied by legislation” ? 

First and foremost we must have “ Free ships, and free materials for ships.” Let 
the American who desires to become a ship-owner do what every foreigner is per¬ 
mitted by the law of his country to do, viz, buy Iris ships wherever he can get them 
cheapest. 

It would be a gross injustice to our ship-building industry, however, to allow free 
ships, unless free materials for ships were also allowed to be brought in irom abroad. 
Inasmuch as the wages of ship-building workmen in the United States are higher 
{owing to the tariff, as already shown), I see nothing else to be done in this behalf, 
than to pay to the ship-builder bounty enough to equalize this element of cost. 

If we are to keep up the principle of protection, every Americau industry is entitled 
to the benefit of it. We pay bounties, through protection (which is a modified form 
of prohibition) to other American manufacturers; but as the ocean is tree and we 
cannot .protect our carriers against those of the outside world by prohibiting or bur¬ 
dening the latter, we must, if we would do justice to this languishing element of our 
national greatness, accomplish the result in this, the only other way. 

I am personally a free trader ; don’t believe in subsidies or bounties ; but I recog¬ 
nize the fact that we have lost our property in shipping, and our hold upon the car¬ 
rying trade of the world, and, like a debtor in the hands of the Sliylocks, we must 
expect to make sacrifices to get them back again. Other remedies have been sug¬ 
gested above, to which I would add two suggestions: 

1st. Let our vessels sailing foreign be privileged to take their stores out of bond 
free of duty, as the British vessels are permitted by that government to do. 

2d. I am informed that quite a large sum is paid as light dues by our vessels trad¬ 
ing to Great Britain ; while no such dues are paid by British vessels trading to this 
country. If this be so I think it would be exceedingly proper that a law should be 
passed requiring light dues to be paid to us by the vessels of those nations which 
require their payment by vessels carrying our flag. 

To recapitulate, we should repeal these provisions of law which— 

1st. Exact tonnage dues. It is, however, to be remembered that under our treaties 
the vessels of many other nations will also thereby become exempt from payment of 
tonnage dues; therefore, if we are to relieve our ships, and leave those of foreign 
nations bound, some scheme, other than a direct repeal, must be resorted to. We 
might repeal it as to the vessels engaged in coasting trade, and pay a bounty (say of 
29 cents per ton per annum) to vessels sailing foreign. 

2d. Consular fees and charges. 

3d. Require payment of extra wages to seamen discharged in foreign ports. 

4th. Require the transportation of destitute seamen to the United States for the 
sum of $10. 

5th. Require the mails to be carried for the postages. 

fith. All laws which prohibit the registry under our flag of foreign built vessels. 

7th. The so-called navigation laws. 

And enact laws which will— 

1st. Admit all ships, no matter where built, to United States registry free of duty. 

2d. Admit all materials for ship-building free of duty. 

3d. Pay a fair compensation for the transportation of destitute seamen. 

4th. Pay a fair compensation for carrying the mails to and from foreign ports. 

5th. If deemed proper or necessary pay a bounty to ship-builders, sufficient to 
equalize wages; but I believe that if materials were admitted free of duty bounties 
would prove to be unnecessary. 

6th. Permit ship stores, of whatever nature, for use in vessels, engaged in foreign 
trade, to be taken from bond free of duty. 

7th. Impose light dues on vessels of those countries which impose them upon our 
vessels. 

I shall be glad to appear before the committee at its next session should the com¬ 
mittee desire. 

Very respectfully, 


JAMES PARKER, 

Secretary. 


Mr. James Parker, secretary of the American Shipmaster’s Association, addressed 
the committee. He stated that he did not own any ships, and was not interested in 
any. He was not an underwriter. He thought that the consular fee system should 
be abolished, and that the United States should pay her own consuls. The ship¬ 
owner should not pay these fees to the consuls. If the latter were not permitted to 
make any charges for their services they could not make an overcharge. 

Mr. Robeson. You do not want to revive ship-building this year, but at the end 
of five years ? 

v * 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


49 


Mr. Parker. I believe in reviving our ship-building interest in order that you 
should be allowed to buy them wherever you please. What we want in this country 
is a revival of ship-owning. We are down in the shipping business, and we have 
got to get up. We charge our own people in this country and all foreigners a ton¬ 
nage tax ot .10 cents per ton. It we abolish that tax as to our own citizens, under 
our treaty stipulations with foreign nations we abolish it also as to the latter. Our 
treaty stipulations are such that whatever benefit we can give to our own ships we 
are bound to accord to foreigners precisely the same benefits that we give to our owu 
people. 

^ Under date of April 25, 1882, the Secretary of the Treasury, in a letter to Hon. H. 
E. Page, chairman of the Committee on Commerce, spoke as follows regarding the 
tonnage tax: 

“ While the shipping of the country gains by these deductions, the loss to the reve¬ 
nue from the tonnage tax of 30 cents per ton (collected once a year) would not prob¬ 
ably exceed 20 per cent, of the amount collected from both foreign and domestic ves¬ 
sels. The total amount of this tax collected from all vessels up to the close of the last 
fiscal year was over a million and a half of dollars. The total amount collected from 
vessels of the United States only for the same period was but a little in excess of a 
quarter of a million. 

“I think the loss to the revenue likely to arise from an abatement in the tonnage 
tax, even if it were as much as 20 per cent, of the gross amount collected, should not 
be objected to the passage of the bill. But it must be remembered that under treaty 
stipulations any deduction from our own tonnage tax will need to be granted in the 
same way or rate to the vessels of most foreign nations.” 

We want cheap ships for all our trade. If the government requires any service from 
its citizens it ought to pay a reasonable amount for such service. Our law teems 
with barbarities, our shipping lias declined, and our men have depreciated. If we 
ever have a war it will be a naval war. At the present date two-thirds of the men 
on board our ships of war are foreigners. If we are ever to have any seamen of our 
own we must resort to some scheme to give them some inducement. The country 
should now prepare American seamen, and the only way you can do that is by the 
apprentice system. It costs more to educate an apprentice for the service of the Navy 
of the United States at present than it does to educate a naval officer. This burden 
should be removed from shipping interests. The law as it now stands treats Ameri¬ 
can ships in foreign ports as a parcel of pirates. Our present tonnage dues are 
enormous. Seamen are now charged 40 cents per month hospital dues, and there is a 
large surplus of money in the Treasury now from this source. It is a war tax and a 
war charge on sailors. My business brings me in contact with the books of vessels of 
all nations, yet the United States is about the only nation that does not allow a citi¬ 
zen to go and get a ship wherever he pleases and run her under our own flag. The 
great fault is in the law. The ship-building of Norway, Sweden, and Italy was very 
largely increased, and the only ships they do buy are the old traps that we want no 
longer. Another point: this shipping act is abominable. There should be some power 
in the majesty of this government to prevent the outrages practiced upon the sailor. 
The sailor of the present day is a very different sort of animal than he was 30 years 
ago. The march of improvement has reached him somewhat. 

Mr. Robeson. You say the reason why we cannot build our ships in this country 
cheaper than elsewhere is because our workmen charge more and because we pay 
more wages ? 

Mr. Parker. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. Then, as a remedy for this difficulty, you would increase the pay, 
ment for ocean postage ? 

Mr. Parker. Not exactly that. That is one remedy, but I think when a man ren¬ 
ders any service he should be paid what that service is really worth. 

Mr. Robeson. You would make no discrimination in favor of carrying the mails on 
the land against ocean carrying ? 

Mr. Parker. No, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. If consuls should perform duties they are not required to without 
receiving any fees for them you think they should be paid a salary ? 

Mr. Parker. Yes, sir. You could pay for those duties in regard to shipping out of 
the Treasury of the United States. 

Mr. Robeson. How does money get into the Treasury of the United States? 

Mr. Parker. By taxes imposed, &c. 

Mr. Robeson. You would pay extra consular duties pertinent to shipping out of the 
income of the government ? 

Mr. Parker. Yes, sir; I would. The prime object, in my judgment, would be to 
relieve ship-owners from actual imposition and the consuls from the imputations of 
exorbitant charges that we now hear so much about. 

067-4 



50 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Robeson. What alterations in regard to taxing ships do you recommend; in 
what respect is it taxed to its destruction ? 

Mr. Parker. I would take off the taxes on the materials, takeoff the increased cost 
of everything that enters into the composition of a ship, consular tees, national and 
State taxes, &c. 

Mr. Robeson. You would relieve it from these taxes ? 

Mr. Parker. Yes, sir ; from taxation of every nature. 

Mr. Robeson. You would take off protection from every other industry and give 
this American shipping protection and relief from taxation ? 

Mr. Parker. I would rob Pennsylvania Peters to pay Maine Pauls. 

Mr. Robeson. Under our system you say the laborer is taxed more for everything 
that he needs for himself and family in America than any other countries ? 

Mr. Parker. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. What, for instance, food ? 

Mr. Parker. He pays more for every article to-day. We know' that we can buy 
beef in London cheaper than here. 

Mr. Robeson. Household furniture and all the essential of common life are not 
dearer than here ; you know that ? 

Mr. Parker. I speak from personal experience in regard to these matters. 

STATEMENT OE ROBERT W. LORD. 

* 

Mr. Robert W. Lord, of Massachusetts, presented his views on the extra-pay system. 
He said that the ship-owning interest of this country was being driven out by the 
burdens that w r e suffer more than other nation. This three months’ extra wages was 
one of our worst burdens. To illustrate this the witness stated the case of one of his 
own vessels, w T hicli sailed from San Francisco for Liverpool. A few days before she 
sailed an English ship came in and discharged her crew'. Four men out of this 
English vessel shipped on his vessel. They were apparently good men. The next day, 
when the vessel was outside, it w as found that tw T o of these men were incapable of 
doing anything. One of them was subject to chronic rheumatism; the other had some 
sort of loathsome disease. Arriving at Liverpool they were sent to the. hospital, and 
three months’ extra wages was demanded, which the ship paid; not only their $25 a 
month, but three months’ additional wages at the same time. They w ere both English¬ 
men. The same vessel shipped two Englishmen. They left without the consent of 
the owners, but the consul exacted three months’ extra pay. It was an incentive to the 
men to make complaints of harsh treatment on shipboard. Another exaction we 
labor under was tonnage taxes. Most of the tonnage that enters the harbor of New 
York is steam tonnage. He thought the tonnage tax should be levied in a different 
way, either as light dues (which is a tax the ship pays for the benefit she receives 
from light-houses) or it should pay each time the vessel enters the port. Either way 
it could be reduced one-third, if not one-sixtli. If reduced to 5 cents a ton and col¬ 
lected every time the ship entered the port it would be a great saving to the ship, 
and the revenue would be as great as it is now. Our consular fees hang as heavily 
upon us as upon English ships. The latter are charging 2s. each for receiving or dis¬ 
charging a crew. In our United States ports $1.25 is received for a certificate of that 
ship’s crew. 

Mr. Candler. What is your opinion of changing the navigation laws ? 

Mr. Lord. It seems to me that we do not wish to give up our ship-building interests, 
and as a nation we have always believed in protection. We are at the very infancy 
of steam sliip-buijding, and if we should pass a law now allowing us to buy English 
steamships it would certainly be much easier and cheaper for us to buy ships in 
England than they could be furnished here, even if duties were rebated to us. In 
Glasgow the ship-building firms have a very large plant. Everything is done in the 
cheapest manner; they have machinery to carry the boiler of a ship and other massive 
portions of iron work from place to place. It would require some very great induce¬ 
ment to our capitalists to go into this business. A ship should receive some protection 
even if we pay a rebate on it. English sailing vessels of iron are built to-day for a 
trifle under $65 a ton. The English outfit is very complete indeed; that I know from 
actual experience and information received from England. Under the present law of 
England it requires that seven shares of the ship shall be owned in England at £10 
each. I can own the rest of an English ship if seven shares are owned outside. At 
the present time w r e are not running any of our vessels. We now have about 10,000 
tons, all engaged in the East India or iron trade. 

Mr. Vest. How many sailing or steam vessels were constructed last year for our 
own trade ? 

Mr. Lord. I cannot tell exactly ; there were one or two for the Havana trade. 

Mr. Vest. How long since the first iron steam vessels w r ere constructed in any 
American ship-yards ? 

Mr. Lord. I cannot say, sir. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


51 


Mr. Vest. They were first constructed by the British in 18:58, were they not f 

Mr. Lord. I cannot say, sir; I believe that was the date. 

^ Mr. Vest. How is it that our iron carrying trade has diminished from 1857, from 
75 per cent, to 15 per cent, this year? 

Mr. Lord. Greater inducements have been offered to ship-owners to put their 
money elsewhere, especially in western railroads. 

Mr. \ est. It has not been on account of the superiority of English iron steamships 
at all ? 

Mr. Lord. It has been the policy of our government to favor land grants for rail¬ 
roads, Ac., and our merchants have put their money largely into them. 

Mr. Vest. The other reason has nothing to do with it ? 

Mr. Lord. Very little, sir. 

Mr. Vest. Is it not a fact that we commenced the construction of these iron ships 
in 1848 in this country? 

Mr. Lord. I cannot say ; I am not posted. 

Mr. Vest. You know we have made no progress in that branch of industrv. 

Mr. Lord. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Vest. Do you believe, under this present system by which foreign ships are 
excluded from sailing under the American fiag, that matters will become anvbetter, 
and if so, why ? ' J ’ 

Mr. Lord. I think that every burden which our American ships labor under should 
be removed, and some stimulus should be given by the government to profnote ship¬ 
building in this country. It seems to me suicidal to open our doors to English steam¬ 
ers at the present time. It would be much better to limit them to five yea^s, and 
then if our American ships can’t stand on their own bottom they had better sink. 

Mr. Dingley. Do you understand that there has been any change in our naviga¬ 
tion laws since 1792 ? 

Mr. Lord. No, sir; I think not. No change in the legislation. 

Mr. Cox. You spoke of giving a stimulant; what for? 

Mr. Lord. For the purposes of ship-building. 

Mr. Cox. Do you mean by stimulant a subsidy? 

Mr. Lord.. Yes, sir; it is the same thing. 

Mr. Cox. What is your definition of subsidy ? 

Mr. Lord. Money paid out of the United States Treasury to a company for doing 
certain things. 

Mr. Cox. Would you pay a subsidy to anybody for doing these things? 

Mr. Lord. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Candler. Do you believe in a change of the navigation laws to promote the 
purchasing of ships abroad, provided there was a duty put upon them ? 

Mr. Lord. Yes, sir; I believe in a change. 

Mr. Robeson. You say there is very little practical difficulty in buying and using 
for our trade an English-built ship, provided you are willing to sail her under an 
English fiag ? 

Mr. Lord. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. Why is this not done largely ? 

Mr. Lord. I think that this law requiring that seven shares of the ship should be 
owned in England has lately been discovered. 

Mr. Robeson. You see no practical difficulty in getting English-built or Scotch- 
built ships? 

Mr. Lord. No, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. Then the real difficulty is in the running? 

Mr. Lord. Yes, under our American laws. 

Mr. Robeson. And the main obstacle is the cost of running the ship? 

Mr. Lord. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. Then it is a question of difference in wages, cost of supplies, and 
taxes, and the fact also that English enterprises were fostered until they got a start. 

Mr. Lord. Yes, sir. 

FURTHER STATEMENT OF HON. WM. ROGERS 

Mr. William Rogers, of Maine, again addressed the committee, stating the diffi¬ 
culties really narrowed themselves down to running a vessel after she was built and 
the question of free ships. He advocated the removing of all restrictions upon ship¬ 
ping, and that our treaty stipulations with foreign nations should be investigated. 
If this nation was the greatest producing and greatest exporting nation in the world 
it would be wise for us to revive our commerce. 

Regarding the steam tonnage in the future, we are willing to labor and match our 
brains and laboring community against those of any other country, and that is the 
position we ought to take to enable us to bring ourselves up to that point, and op¬ 
erate our works by giving us material free which enters into the ship. This will en¬ 
tail upon us the necessity of erecting machine shops and adopting every known de- 


52 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


vice we can to enable us to perform the work to the utmost advantage, and in a 
short time we believe we can produce a vessel equal to any nation in the world. 
That is my theory. 

Regarding the restrictions that are now upon us that enter into the difficulty of 
competing with other nations, it was a great mistake to suppose that the day ol 
wooden tonnage is passed—more than half the tonnage to-day is wooden, and nearly 
two t hirds of the British tonnage is in the sailing vessel. The wooden vessel is a 
better risk for insurers. If we could have encouragement to build our vessels as 
they can be built 1 do not apprehend any trouble in competing with any sailing ves¬ 
sel of any material. Enable us to do it as regards steam by taking off the duty on 
all articles entering into a ship’s composition. When a vessel comes into Liverpool 
three times a year the British officials come on board and measure the space that the 
cargo occupies on deck and charge her an extra tonnage due on that and an extra 
light-liouse duty. She next goes to St. John’s, New Brunswick, and when she gets 
to Liverpool, as I said, they measure every foot that was occupied by her deck, and 
charge her additional light-house dues and anchor dues, making her expense in and 
around there three times over $1,200. The Bulgarian comes into Boston with false 
slides in which she carries cargo. Fees are only charged for the cargo which is seen. 
She thus eludes the tonnage dues, which is manifestly unjust. 

Mr. Cox. You think one half the tonnage of the world now is in wooden ships. 
What is the proportion to-day of wooden and what is iron of our tonnage and coast¬ 
wise trad? and foreign trade ? 

Mr. Rogers. All wood, except a very few steamers in the coastwise trade. 

Mr. Cox. It is not possible for us to make wooden vessels in New York City, is it ? 

Mr. Rogers. No, sir. 

Mr. Cox. It is obsolete for New York City ? 

Mr. Rogers. Yes. There are ship-yards here, but they are very few, and the rents 
here are higher. 

Mr. Cox. Can we build as cheaply as you do in Maine, and compete with Nova 
Scotia and other places ? 

Mr. Rogers. Yes, sir; our wood comes from all over the country—the Southern 
States especially. The only advantage in being in Maine is that we have become, 
perhaps, more adapted to that peculiar line of business than they have in other loca¬ 
tions ; besides, we have the machinery and tools to do the work, and our plant is 
larger. 

Mr. Candler. Would the importation of iron steamships of over 3,000 tons injure 
your business ? 

Mr. Rogers. Yes, sir ; if it went into the coastwise trade. 

Mr. Candler. Foreign trade ? 

Mr. Rogers. Not as situated at present; only where it would take from us an ad¬ 
ditional vessel. 

Mr. Candler. It is not a matter of competition between nations, but a matter of 
sailing steamships ? 

Mr. Rogers. Yes, sir; that is it. 

Mr. Candler. What proportion of the coastwise trade is done by foreigners ? 

Mr. Rogers. Four-fifths. If we have only one in five of our native element in the 
coastwise trade, where are we going to drift to for future resource for ourselves? 

Mr. Cox. Did this tonnage tax exist before the war ? 

Mr. Rogers. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. What was it? 

Mr. Rogers. Thirty cents a ton per annum. 

Mr. Cox. What is the object of that taxation ? 

Mr. Rogers. It is only one of the revenues of our government. 

FURTHER STATEMENT OF CAPT. B. S. OSBON. 

Capt. B. S. Osbon was again called. 

Mr. Robeson. Have you any information about the number and amount of iron 
ships and sailing vessels built in this country ? 

Captain Osbon. We have built a bark, a brig, two schooners, and three yachts 
in sailing vessels within the last three years. From 1836 Harlan & Hollingsworth 
have built 164 iron vessels; Pusey & Jones, 30 or 40; Cramp, 4 Russian naval vessels; 
John Roach, about 93, of 500 tons, exclusively for the foreign trade. That comprises 
all, I think. 

Mr. Cox. What proportion of these have gone under foreign flags ? 

Captain Osbon. Nearly all the vessels built by Pusey & Jones. We can build ships 
here, but this country is threatened by Englishmen who propose to run us off, and 
when they fail to do it on the ocean with their guns and their men they take means 
of using us up by their money. 

The committee, at 3.45 o’clock, adjourned. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 

t 

STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN C. C. DUNCAN. 


53 


Novemrer 19, 1382. 

I he committee met at 10..50 a. m. Present, the chairman, Messrs. Candler, Cox 
and Diugley. 

Captain C. C. Duncan, ship commissioner of the port of New York, read the fol¬ 
lowing letter to the committee: 


Office of tiie 

Hon. O. D. Conger, 

Committee on Skipping : 


United States Shipping Commissioner, 

New York, October 30, 1882. 


\ 


Dear Sir: In the great problem touching our American shipping, now before you, 
I venture to submit such facts, figures, and ideas as I have, in the hope that you will 
find, something among them that will aid you towards correct conclusions. 

Our merchant marine attained its greatest prosperity in the decade of 1850-60. 

Ihe causes that led to that prosperity are easily stated : First and cliielly, a discrim¬ 
inating duty of 10 per cent, in favor of all imports in American bottoms. (Section 
2o02 Revised Statutes.) This gave to our ships great advantage in every foreign 
port so far as trade with this country was concerned; indeed, in many foreign ports, 
our ships had a monopoly of this trade. * 

Ihe immediate consequence was, that, stimulated and encouraged, we putafloatthe 
finest sailing ships in the world; ships that were better appointed in every respect 
and did their work to more general satisfaction than the ships of any other nation. 

Abundant employment ottered in every direction; cotton, rice, and tobacco, from 
the Gulf and other Southern ports; breadstuff's from the other Atlantic ports; deals 
and timber from the British Provinces ; sugars from the West Indies ; guano from the 
Pacific; grain from California; cargoes to and from Europe, United States, East In¬ 
dies and China; cargoes of coal and general merchandise from ports on the Atlantic to 
San Francisco and other ports on the Pacific. The demands of the Crimean war, and 
our own large coasting trade, all combined to give abundant and generally profitable 
employment to our large and growing merchant marine. 

The war of the rebellion was the beginning of its misfortunes. The following 
statement will show how our merchant marine went into the war in 1861, and how it 
came out in 1866. 

I extract from government statistics showing the amount of tonnage we had in 
each of those years and note the difference. 



1 1861.. 

1 

1866. 

Loss. 

Gain. 

Registered or foreign going sailing vessels. 

Enrolled or coasting :fnd inland sailing vessels. 

Registered or foreign going steam vessels. 

Enrolled or coasting and inland steam vessels. 

Tons. 

2,540.020 

2, 064, 803 
102, 608 
774, 596 

Tons. 
1,294, 637 
1,893,314 
198, 289 
885, 223 

Tons. 

1, 245, 383 
171, 489 

Tons. 

95, 681 
110, 627 



Total.. 

5,482,027 

4, 271, 463 

1, 210, 564 



It will be seen by this statement that while in steam tonnage we had gained 176,308 
tons, or about one-fifth, one-half of our registered sailing tonnage and between eight 
and nine per cent, of our enrolled tonnage had been lost; and that in the aggregate 
we had lost nearly one-fourth of our entire merchant marine during the war. And 
in 1866, when the waters of the world were once more open to us, we found ourselves 
confronted with changes so vast, and to us so unfavorable, in the sea-going carrying 
trade all over the world, that the attempt to regain our former position and prosperity 
seemed, to those who gave the matter intelligent thought, hopeless. 

The cotton, tobacco, and rice trades from Southern and Gulf ports were gone; ship¬ 
ments of guano from the Pacific had ceased. The discriminating duty of 10 percent, 
on all imports by American vessels that brought such great prosperity to our ships 
had been lost by treaties. The tonnage we had lost during the war had been more 
than replaced by foreign vessels, chiefly British. Iron ships were coming to be pre¬ 
ferred to wooden ones, and steam to sails, and this was but the beginning of what 
has now, in 1882, come to be almost an entire revolution in ocean freighting. 

The route to and from India lyis been shortened two fifths by the Suez Canal, thereby 
reducing the demand by that proportion for tonnage in that trade, and that part which 
remains is almost entirely supplied by English steamers. The Atlantic and Pacific 
railways are carrying vast quantites of freight such as used to employ sailing ships 
going around Cape Horn. Coast lines of railroads and steamships, either connected 


















54 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


or distinct, liave captured from our sailing vessels about all there is in coasting ex¬ 
cepting such articles as ice, coals, timber, granite, and lime. The bulk of the carry¬ 
ing trade of the world is now done by iron steamships, English or English built, or 
rather British or British built, for the most of them are built ou the Clyde. We have 
a few of American build, but they are very few comparatively. 

Besides the regular mail lino steamers running to all our principal ports, the British 
have a multitude of iron freight steamers, “ocean tramps ” as they are called. They 
are built for the greatest possible capacity for freight with the smallest expenditure 
of coal. They steam 7 01 8 knots, are “ steamers,” and as such command freight with 
the best. Every winter more 1 or less of them go down ; nevertheless, they swarm at 
every port, and are ready for every available freight. 

I send inclosed some statistics of the export movement of the principal articles that 
went to make up ships’ cargoes during last year. I have stated the values as the 
most convenient way of noting the proportions at different ports. 

You will notice the great excess of shipments from New York over all other ports. 

A vast number of foreign steamships run in regular lines between this and the 
great ports of Europe, and they seem to be increasing daily in numbers and capacity. 
These steamers, carrying mails and passengers, have to sail on their appointed days, 
full or not full, taking freight at whatever the rates current maybe, and it often hap¬ 
pens that grain, dour, &c., are taken along by them freight free, serving as needed 
ballast. 

It is very difficult for an American sailing vessel to get a cargo at this or any other 
port—on a steamer route—that will pay expenses, except of goods (such as oil audits 
products) that steamers do not carry. 

You will notice that oils and their products form an important part of the exports 
from this and other Atlantic ports. These give the bulk of employment to American 
sailing vessels, and are about all there is uow for them in the Atlantic ports in freights 
to foreign ports. 

In the Pacific the grain trade from California to Europe offers fair competition, and 
usually fair remuneration to carriers—sailing ships of all nations—and in this our 
ships evidently hold their own. 

There were shipped 22,029,331 bushels of wheat and 650,728barrels of dour, making 
a total of 726,000 tons weight, last year from San Francisco, and carried by 290 Ameri¬ 
can ships of 243,743 tons, and 254 foreign ships of 262,568 tons, a total of 544 ships 
and 506,311 tons. 

The fact that the number and size of our ships for this trade are steadily increasing 
year by year, seems to be proof that iu the main the owners of such ships dud them 
profitable. 

The ship-yards where most of them are built were never so busy as now. Bath, 
the principal ship-building port iu the United States, built in 1872 14,304 tons of ship¬ 
ping, and in 1877 30,472 tons; will in 1882 have built 42,000 tons. 

In the dfteeu years extending from June, 1866—the close of the war—to June, 1881, 
our merchant marine still declined, as will be seen by the following official dgures : 


1866 

1881. 

Loss. 

Gain. 

Registered or foreign going sailing vessels. 

Enrolled or coasting and inland sailing vessels. 

Tons. 

. 1, 294, 637 

1 893 314 

Tons. 

1, 182, 817 
1, 551, 246 
152, 769 
1,105, 958 

Tons. 
111,820 
342,068 . 
45,520 

Tons. / 

Registered or foreign going steam vessels. 

Enrolled or coasting and inland steam vessels. 

198' 289 
885, 223 

220, 735 




Total.. 

4, 271. 463 

3, 992, 790 

499,408 

220,735 


Total loss, 278.C73 tons. 


This being the situation, what can be done to improve it ? 

With existing laws can our ships—sailing and steam—be sailed as cheaply as the 
ships of Great Britain, our most formidable competitor ? I think they can. Victual¬ 
ing and manning are the greatest items of expense in sailing ships; and also add¬ 
ing coals to the list in steamships. 

The following statements show that our sailing vessels and steamships are success¬ 
fully navigated with considerably fewer men than the ships of Great Britain, always 
excepting the British freight steamers or “ocean tramps” before allm.ed to. 

The records of the British consulate at this port show that 538,245 tons of British 
sailing vessels entered this port during the first nine months of this year, January 
1 to October 1, and that they were manned by 11,857, or 1 man to every 454 tons. 

The records of this office for the same period show the departure of 304,981 tons of 
American sailing vessels manned by 4,945 men, or 1 man to every 61f tons. In other 
words we navigate our sailing ships with one-quarter less men than are required to 
navigate British ships. 













I 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 55 


The relative manning of British and American steamers, carrying mails, freight, 
nnd passengers, is shown by the following lists : 

BRITISH STEAMSHIPS. 


Steamers. 


Germania. 

Scythia. 

Anclioria. 

Erin .. 

Wisconsin.. 

Gallia. 

Adriatic . 

State of Georgia 

Total. 


Tons. 

Men. 

3,150 

169 

2,997 

164 

2,713 

98 

2, 910 

98 

2, 386 

106 

3,082 

184 

2,458 

129 

1, 604 

75 

21, 300 

1,023 


Or one man to every 20§ tons.* 


AMERICAN STEAMSHIPS. 


Ships. 

Tons. 

Men. 

Citv of Para. 


73 


2 685 

6 ° 

Acapulco . 

o 572 

61 

Crescent City. 

1 731 

55 

City of Mexico ... 

1 0 9 6 

45 

Citv of Atlanta . 

1 621 

35 

City of Savannah. 

2 029 

55 

City of Columbia. 

1 875 

40 

Santo Domingo. 

1 642 

35 

Total. 

18, 681 

461 



Or one man to every 40£ tons. 


These statements, which are accurate, show that we can navigate our steamers 
that carry mails, freight, and passengers with one half, and our sailing ships with 
about three fourths, of the number of men that are required in like service by British 
ships. 

The following statements show the comparative manning of British and American 
steamships carrying freight only : 

BRITISH STEAMSHIPS. 


Total .. 


10. 925 


Names. 

Tons. 

Men. 

Lepanto . 

1,871 

1 135 

31 

Macedonia, *____________ 

24 

Metapedia. 

1,454 
1.913 
1,482 
1,275 
1, 795 

34 

Bretwalder....... 

29 

Benlarig. 

32 

Salisbury.. 

25 

Alsatia. 

39 



214 


Say one man to every 51 tons. 

AMERICAN FREIGHT STEAMSHIPS. 


Names. 


Walla-Walla. 

Valencia. 

Caracas . 

Carondelet.... 
City of Dallas 

Florida. 

Gulf Stream .. 

Total ... 


Tons. 

"Men. 

2,176 

49 

1, 598 

39 

1,588 

38 

1, 508 

33 

914 

24 

514 

14 

998 

34 

9, 296 

231 




Or one man to every 401 tons. 




















































































56 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Sailors’ wages are identified not with any particular nationality, but with every 
port; and in all the larger ports ships of all nations pay the wages current. All ior* 
eign ships in American Atlantic ports have to pay ;i little more for their men than 
American ships pay. 

Wages rule in European ports somewhat lower than in the Atlantic ports ot the 
United States, and considerably lower than in our ports on the Pacific ; but usually 
in all the larger ports of the world—excepting perhaps China, Japan, and ports in 
the East and West Indies—ships change their crews. 

Sailors finding higher wages current than they are receiving, will leave their ships, 
either by desertion or otherwise, to obtain them ; and masters finding lower wages 
current than they are paying usually discover that their old crews have left, and new 
crews at lower wages have to be supplied in their places. 

The means to accomplish all this are generally devious, but is usually accomplished, 
the original terms of agreement to the contrary notwithstanding; so it comes about 
that in every port ships of all nations stand upon pretty much the same footing, not 
only as to sailors’ wages, but also as to pilotage, quarantine charges, wharfage, ton¬ 
nage dues, stevedores’ charges, and merchants’ commissions. 

The situation, then, as to our merchant marine seems to me to be this, viz: The 
ships that we have, both steam and sailing, are run at very considerable less expense 
than the ships of Great Britain—Britisli freight steamers excepted. 

On the Pacific our sailing ships are competing successfully for work, and are in the 
main prospering. 

On the Atlantic our wooden sailing vessels have pretty nearly disappeared, and iron 
steamships have taken their places. The same is true of East Indian waters. 

Iron steamships are required for, and they are doing, the great bulk of all the car¬ 
rying—freight, passengers, and mails—on the Atlantic and Indian oceans, and on 
the Mediterranean. Foreign nations have the iron steamships, and do the work. 
We have comparatively no such ships; and do comparatively none of the work; 
and now the perplexing question is how, with foreign steamers in full possession of 
every foreign route in every one of our large Atlantic ports, and with more than suf¬ 
ficient tonnage already in line to carry every mail-bag, every passenger, and every 
pound of freight that is to be carried, can we again get a foothold from which to 
work with a possibility of success back towards our former prosperity and prestige. 

If ever a question demanded profound and disinterested statesmanship in its solu¬ 
tion, certainly this one does. 

My own ideas as to what should be done are crude, and, perhaps, unwise and imprac¬ 
ticable; and although based on pretty close observation of a whole lifetime connec¬ 
tion with our shipping interests, and, in the light that I have, thoroughly believed 
in by myself, I feel diffident in intruding them upon you ; yet, for whatever they 
may be worth I send them. 

The subject of discriminating duty should be carefully considered, and, if practi¬ 
cable, section 2502 Revised Statutes, in its fullest force and without the qualification 
contained in the last half of the section, should be restored. 

All materials of every kind used in the construction of ships, wooden, iron, or steel, 
should be available to ship-builders free of duty ; section 2513 of the Revised Statutes 
should be amended by including cables, anchors, iron and steel plates, sheathing 
metal, and wire rigging ; and excluding the restriction as to foreign trade and foreign 
voyages, thereby putting coasting and foreign-going vessels on the same footing. 

Citizens of the United States should be permitted to purchase and bring to this 
country free of duty aud place under the flag of the United States foreign steam or 
sailing ships built of iron or steel. 

A bounty equivalent to the present foreign tonnage tax (or tax on American ves¬ 
sels making foreign voyages), say 30 cents per ton, should be granted and paid an¬ 
nually to all American vessels engaged in trade with foreign ports. 

Liberal postal compensation to fast lines of American steamers going foreign from 
our principal ports. 

Bonded stores free of duty to all foreign-going vessels. 

Repeal of the law, so far as the principal ports of Europe are concerned, requiring 
three months’ extra pay to all American seamen discharged in foreign ports. 

Reasonable compensation for bringing home destitute seamen under consuls’ or¬ 
ders. 


Very respectfully, 


C. C. DUNCAN, 

United Stales Shipping Commissioner, Port of New York. 


The Chairman. Suppose you have the same plant as on the Clyde, do you question 
the ability of American ship-builders to build ships as cheaply here ? 

Captain Duncan. No, sir; not for skill, nor for industry. We only desire the 
plant, otherwise we know how to do it. 

The Chairman. You say we cannot do this ourselves; we have got to go abroad. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


57 


The proposition that we cannot do this simply implies great inferiority of race or 
ability ? 

Captain Duncan. It implies this inferiority—our men demand higher wages for 
their work. It will be years and years before our people can compete with foreign 
nations. By and by they can compete with and exceed the old country in the produc¬ 
tion of iron ships. There are two yards in Philadelphia, but years and years have 
got to elapse before they can utilize them and build steamers that float. 

The Chairman. If we have done it, why do you say we never can do it ? 

Captain Duncan. We have done it, but it is the new difficulties I am speaking of. 

The Chairman, "i on don’t say that that can be done by paying greater wages—you 
say it cannot be done at all ? 

Captain Duncan. Citizens of the United States should be permitted to purchase 
and bring to this country free of duty, and place under the flag of the United States, 
foreign steam and sailing ships built of iron or steel; a bounty equivalent to the pres¬ 
ent tonnage tax (already taxed on American vessels making foreign voyages), say 30 
cents per ton, should be granted and paid annually to all American vessels engaged 
in trade with foreign ports. That does not prevent Mr. Roach or other builders from 
building as good ships as anywhere else. 

The Chairman. What is the reason for this? 

Captain Duncan. Because our citizens are not permitted to bring to this country 
tree of duty foreign iron, steel, or sailing ships under the American flag. 

Mr. Cox. There is nothing incompatible in our buying both ? 

Captain Duncan. No, sir. 

Mr. Candler. Because we have not the labor, and that costs more than skill. 

Captain Duncan. According to the laws of the last Congress sliip-builders have to 
pay more than they would if permitted to buy elsewhere. 

The Chairman. We had better encourage them and give them our business ? 

Captain Duncan. I think that our ship-owners have so many difficulties to labor 
under that they should have every facility granted to them that can be accorded by 
Congress, and if they want to go abroad and buy ships I think Congress should allow 
them to do so. 

Mr. Dingley. The reason why we cannot build them now is on account of the high 
price of labor ; is that because we don’t know how ? How can we compete with the 
builders on the Clyde ? 

Captain Duncan. If our iron steamship-builders find that our folks have the priv¬ 
ilege of going abroad to buy steamers they will not be long in trying to import labor 
and to bring prices down. 

Mr. Cox. Have you not statistics to show when the German people had the priv¬ 
ilege of buying ships abroad ? 

Captain Duncan. No, sir; I have not. 

Mr. Cox. Do you know the facts ? 

Captain Duncan. I only know that they went to England to buy ships. 

Mr. Dingley. Germany had no disability on account of the price of labor; the diffi¬ 
culty now is in the greater cost of the labor in this country. If our labor was as 
cheap here as in England we could have no difficulty at all in building our iron steam¬ 
ship ? 

Captain Duncan. It may be so. The prestige that the Clyde has as far as experi¬ 
ence goes, is a great factor. 

Mr. Dingley. Should we get that experience if we go to England and buy them ? 

Captain Duncan. We should get the same experience without buying, in my judg¬ 
ment; with the privilege of importing from them, we should not be long in succeed- 
ing. 

Mr. Dingley. Can we not to-day build iron steamships as cheaply ason the Clyde ? 

Captain Duncan. I should think not; but two firms have been able to attempt the 
steamship business. 

Mr. Dingley. Suppose that by admitting certain materials free of duty we can 
build our steamships here in competition with the Clyde, would you prefer that remedy 
to the remedy of having them built on the Clyde ? 

Captain Duncan. Certainly; if you could demonstrate it. There are two conflict¬ 
ing elements, the ship-owners and the ship-builders, who each have a different set 
of interests. The owners naturally wish to buy ships where they can buy them 
cheapest. 

The Chairman. Then the ship-builders should be sacrificed to the ship-owners ? 

Captain Duncan. No, sir; not sacrificed. I cannot see that it can be construed in 
that way exactly. Ship-owners would have a fair chance for competition. The Yan¬ 
kee ship-builder can compete with any one if you give him a fair chance. 

Mr. Dingley. Would it not be better to give liimachance, and not buy our ships on 
the Clyde ? 

Captain Duncan. My idea would be to give the matter atrial fora couple of years,, 
and see how it would work. We never will compete successfully on the ocean, with 


58 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


every foot of ground occupied by foreign steamers, unless our ship-owners have some 
extraordinary facilities given them. 

The Chairman. Suppose we could not run them as cheap, what good is it to give 
them an opportunity to buy? 

Captain Duncan. We can run our ships cheaper. There is no reason that we should 
not compete with foreign built vessels except this; they have their connections al¬ 
ready made ; we must have extraordinary encouragement to begin with; Congress 
must do everything it can if we are to have a foot-hold. 

Mr. Dixgley. What do you mean by “extraordinary encouragement ?” 

Captain Duncan. By that I mean permission to carry mails given by the govern¬ 
ment—corresponding prices to those paid by the British. I should object to any one 
firm being paid at the expense of others. 

Mr. Dingley. Do you remember the year we entered into the treaty with Great 
Britain which gave her maritime reciprocity ? 

Captain Duncan. From 1840 to 1850 American ships were at a premium; they 
were always sought because of their 10 per cent, rebate in favor of all imports in 
American bottoms. In 1850 I was connected with ships, and I know there was no 
discriminating duty then. That rebate was just and square, aud a source of our re¬ 
ciprocity. 

Mr. Cox. How can we do this when these treaties exist ? 

Captain Duncan. I would abrogate the treaties. 

Mr. Cox. Is it possible for New York to compete with Maine in wooden ship-build¬ 
ing? 

Captain Duncan. It is possible ; the only obstacles would be the appliances that 
have been brought to bear in the Eastern country, but with these appliances we 
could do it. 

Mr. Cox. There is no reason why ships cannot be built in New York, up at Long 
Island, as cheaply as they are in Maine. In Maine they have the machinery and the 
plant to do the work. 

Captain Duncan. If we had the same facilities here there would be no difficulty. 

Mr. Dingley. Would not Long Island have the advantage over Maine in respect 
to hard pine and oak ? 

Captain Duncan. They would have to bring their knees and upper frames from 
Canada and Maine, and the difference in these would hardly offset the difference on 
freight they would meet with on iron from Georgia and the Southern States. 

Mr. Dingley. About the three months’ extra wages—would you regard the aboli¬ 
tion of this to the advantage of the sailor ? 

Captain Duncan. It would put money in the sailor’s pocket. 

Mr. Dingley. Why ? 

Captain Duncan. In almost every case ships going from San Francisco to Liver 
pool discharge their crews in Liverpool. It is so arranged there that when men are- 
discliarged from an American ship they forfeit one month’s extra pay for the privilege 
of being left. They get the sailor to waive the one month’s extra pay, which the gov¬ 
ernment receives, and the sailor is without this month’s wages. The sailor is just 
as well off landed in auy European port as he would be in New York. In the princi¬ 
pal ports of Europe there is no reason why a sailor should not be discharged. 

Mr. Candler. Where this arrangement is made does not the consul get two 
months? 

Captain Duncan. The government has one month, the sailor two. The sailor 
waives the two months altogether, and is required to give a month which he has 
hardly earned, so that it does not go to the consul at all. 

Mr. Cox. Suppose we enact a law repealing all these burdens, and allow stores to 
be taken out of bond free and give a rebate on materials which”go into iron and 
wooden ships, would we be able to compete and restore our shipping? 

Captain Duncan. We would get to the front end in some way by pushing. 

Mr. Cox. What is the difference between allowing rebate on specific component 
parts of a ship and the freedom of buying the finished ship ? 

Captain Duncan. The rebate covers wooden ships, and you would place the ship¬ 
builder at a disadvantage if you do not allow him to import ships. There is only the 
difference in the price of labor. 

Mr. Cox. The experience of the Germans is very instructive, and when they com¬ 
mence to buy they commence to build, and thus stimulate their ship-building interest. 

Mr. Dingley. A fair parallel cannot be drawn between Germany and America, be¬ 
cause of the difference in the price of labor in the two countries. Do you know the 
proportion of sailors of American birth who man American vessels that left this port 
last year ? 

Captain Duncan. I went over my books for a year and observed that about one in 
-every three claimed to be Americans. They are not always so; however, they de¬ 
clare themselves Americans. I should think about 33£ per cent. were. 


AMERICAN SHAPING INTERESTS. 59 

Mr. D ingley. Do you believe tluit 33-J- per cent, of the sailors on American vessels 
are Americans ? 

Captain Duncan. Yes, sir; I believe that, but whether the sailors are English, or 
any nationality, they require the same protection and the same care. 

It was said by Mr. Rogers yesterday that it would be better for the sailor and owner 
it they were allowed to go right together and make their bargain; that the ship 
commissioner was rather a nuisance than otherwise, aud that they should engage 
their sailors as servants are engaged. I presume you will hardly dispute that the 
two things are altogether different. Sailors are engaged to go away under a great 
disadvantage—from all protection and all sources of possible relief—and it seems to 
me abundantly necessary that there should be some safeguard in the way in which 
they are engaged. I nder the old system we gave our orders to the shipping-master^ 
and he would say, ** Here are your men, captain; they are a little in liquor, but here 
they are. I hese men generally know nothing of the contract they are making. 
They would be taken when they were least capable of taking care of themselves. 
I nder the present supervision the sailors have to go before the shipping commis¬ 
sioner, and be sober when they are shipped. There are some abuses, however, that 
follow. There should be supervision over the agreement, that it is all right. If they 
have any complaint to make there should be some one to hear it; some one should 
be interested for him; safeguards should be thrown around them at the expiration 
of the voyage ; some one should see that the captain has carried out his stipulations. 
Mr. Rogers said that sailors were often taken on board drunk in New York. So far as 
the supervision of the shipping commissioner is concerned, that is not true. The 
sailors are shipped a day or two previous to the time at which they are wanted, and 
receive their advancement in my presence. In a day or two afterward the captain 
says he wants his crew at four o’clock in the morning, or at eleven o’clock at night, 
or at any hour he may name. I see they are on board at the time desired. They get 
there. My officers go to the boarding-houses, and as a rule the men are sober in every 
case; the officers go on board the ship and if a man is drunk or disorderly the cap¬ 
tain has the option of having him removed, but he usually holds on to him, having 
already received three to five dollars “ blood money.” 

As for advance wages, if we could blot out this, it would be the greatest advantage 
offered to sailors. If you enact it, it must be against every vessel. Our steamships pay 
no advance, and we have no trouble with their men at all. The advance wages are 
given to the sailor, which is the great evil. Men “ bleed” the sailors and put the 
money into their pockets. 

Mr. Cox. Who gets this money ? 

Captain Duncan. In my judgment ship-owners get the most of it. When my of¬ 
fice was first established there was the greatest commotion in shipping circles. I 
had not been long in carrying out the law before this feeling wilted. I found mas¬ 
ters were bringing up their crews loosely. I learned to my satisfaction that the mo¬ 
dus opera nd i was this: The captain wants a crew ; the landlord says I w r ill give you 
one hundred dollars for the privilege of shipping them ; the landlord goes to the 
market, the sailor gets ten, the captain gets five; and I found things in that shape*; 
then I instantly shut down and said that the captain must have the opportunity to 
pick his men in my office. This created a great rumpus, and I saw some men com¬ 
ing in and noticed that the captain would look around and pick the men who had a 
certain kind of hat. or a certain insignia, or recognition. These men were called 
out every time. I kept up this fight for eighteen months and found it was useless. 
The men were lying and paying “ blood money,” when they said they w ere not. The 
landlords kept faith for three or four weeks and then .broke down. That is the way 
the thing is done now. The sailor is in accord with the shipping-master. In this 
way they come to the office and are shipped. The landlords give the sailors to un¬ 
derstand that the “blood money” goes to the commissioner, and if they do not pay 
this money to the landlords they will not be allowed to ship. 

The Chairman. There is nothing in the shipping commissioners’ bill in regard to 
advance wages ? 

Captain Duncan. It is there stipulated that advance notes shall be given to men in 
the presence of the commissioner. 

Mr. Ding ley. A law has been recently enacted prohibiting advance notes? 

Captain Duncan. Yes, sir; and owners are required to ship and pay off the men 
before the commissioner, atid they are required to do it in person. The master brings 
'whatever men he pleases, aud the shipping commissioner is bound to receive them. 

Mr. Cox. What is the expense of running your office ? 

Captain Duncan. The office fees last year amounted to $20,000; the expense is de¬ 
frayed by fees. 

Mr. Cox What are the salaries of your officers ? 

Captain Duncan. The salary is fixed by Congress as not to exceed $4,000 to the 
deputies. 

Mr. Cox. What is the aggregate amount of salary; is there any surplus paid into 
the treasury ? 


GO 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Captain Duncan. On one or two occasions, but we liave to enconomize to get that. 

Mr. Cox. How many officers have you ? 

Captain Duncan. Three deputies. 

Mr. Cox. Who are they ? 

Captain Duncan. My three sons. I h ive a cashier, Mr. Lewis Belclier; an out-door 
steamer deputy, Mr. Frank Paulton ; two out-door officers, Mr. Hank and Mr. Range- 
ford. 

Mr. Cox. Your jurisdiction extends to all parts of New York ? 

Captain Duncan. My jurisdiction extends to wherever the port extends. 

Mr. Cox. You say the aggregate fees of the office are about $20,000? 

Captain Duncan. About that. The maximum salaries are fixed by law. 

• Mr. Cox. Any surplus paid last year ? 

Captain Duncan. No, sir. 

Mr. Cox. Did you render your account ? 

Captain Duncan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. Are your men pretty well employed all the time ? 

Captain Duncan. Sometimes — it varies. 

Mr. Cox. How many sailors have you shipped during the year? 

Captain Duncan. We shipped a great many more than the fees called for — about 
10,000 men last year. Where a man makes a second voyage in a ship all the work is 
done free. 

Mr. Cox. These fees pay every expenses of your office ? 

Captain Duncan. Yes, sir; every expense. The shipping-fees paid by the shipping- 
master run all the way from $2 to $5. 

Mr. Cox. This law is only intended to guard the sailor against his improvidences, 
is it not ? 

Captain Duncan. It has that effect. Incidentally it works in the protection of the 
ship-owner. 

Mr. Cox^ How ? 

Captain Duncan. The sailors are put on board sober, and if a man deserts his ad¬ 
vance notes are not paid. A captain came to me yesterday and submitted a case for 
false imprisonment. They had sinned, according to the captain’s logic of the law, 
because they went on shore in Spa-iu on Sunday. I made the captain pay the fee. 
One of the great advantages of the law to ships is my supervision over incompetent 
seamen. If a captain says that a cook or steward has not done his duty, I examine 
them and look into the merits or demerits of the case. 

Mr. Cox. Is there a general contentment among ship-owners? 

Captain Duncan. There is among the better class. They all remonstrate against 
the repeal of the law. 

Mr. Cox. Is there a general content among those who are owners only ? 

Captain Duncan. I think there is, so far as I have heard. For the last year or 
more there is a general complaint, and the ship-owners feel that the law is oppressive 
in some instances. Under the old law a deserted seaman’s money, although required 
fo go to the captain, generally gets into the owner’s pocket; under the present law 
the commissioner gets this. There is complaint about this. 

Mr. Cox. How is it with the sailors; are they willing that you should make con¬ 
tracts for them ? 

Captain Duncan. We don’t make contracts for them. 

Mr. Cox. Are they content with the law ? 

Captain Duncan. They are, so far as 1 know. 

Mr. Dingley. Regarding the three months’ extra wages, what modification of ex¬ 
isting law would you propose ? 

Captain Duncan. I don’t know how to word the modification ; my idea is to allow 
captains to discharge and pay oft' their men in the principal ports of Europe. I 
would not go beyond that. 

Mr. Candler. You would not allow a man to be discharged in any port? 

Captain Duncan. I would stipulate certain larger ports in the world in which 
sailors may be discharged. 

Mr. Cox. What was the cause of so much complaint against your office: was it 
growing out of the fact that the ship-owners desired to hire their own crews ; what 
was the burden of it ? 

Captain Duncan. The opposition emanated from two men. Beyond that I don’t know 
anything of the source. The ship-owners and ship-masters disliked to go so far to my 
office to ship men ; they complained that it was too far from their place of business. 
The landlords were pretty well satisfied; they have been educated into better treat¬ 
ment of their men by the ship commissioners’ law. 

Mr. Cox. Is there not a better class of landlords now ? 

Captain Duncan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. What are these advance notes? 

Captain Duncan. They were notes given to sailors by me and cashed on board of 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 61 


tlic vessel, and in many cases the sailors would try to run and jump ashore after 
shipping. 

Mr. DingleY. Would it not be practicable to repeal the law paying advance wages 
except in cases where it is to be paid to the families or in advance notes? 

Captain Duncan. I think it would be better to leave it off. These advance wages 
are mining the sailor. It is the whole foundation of the strength of the landlords. 

At 1*2 m. the committee adjourned until 10 o’clock Monday morning. 

STATEMENT OF MR. WILLIAM NELSON. 

Fifth Avenue Hotel, New York City, 

November 20, 1882. 

The committe met at 10.30 a. m. Present, the chairman, Messrs. Dingley, Candler, 
and Cox. 

Mr. William Nelson, of New York City, appeared before the committee and said: 

1 am an old ship owner of New York City, and have owned ships for the last 
thirty years. Now I am down in the world. You have heard the ship-building com¬ 
munity and we would like to have you hear our interests. I have recently made a 
tour around the world, and I was not at all surprised t o find a total absence of our flag 
in nearly every port on the globe. The ship-owning and ship-building community are 
fast depreciating. Capital is very exacting and timid, and will onlyplace itself where 
it can feel secure. I have refused entirely to loan money on a ship as security. You 
loan money to the ship-owner or upon the ship, which goes away from the port and in 
a year you may find you do not own the ship stt all. Our laws are so lax they defeat 
their own intent, and by a little chicanery a man loaning money on a ship is often 
cheated, for there is no way you can ascertain whether there is a prior claim upon the ship. 
In almost all the great ship-owning countries banking capital enters into a ship. A 
ship-builder will take a large contract and the bank will supply him with the money. 
Here you cannot do it. No bank would think of loaning money on a ship, and you 
can never have a large increase of shipping until this point is settled. We are in the 
same place as Russia and Spain, they give but little encouragement to foreign ship¬ 
ping. As you all know—they are high-tariff countries. 

Mr. Cox. Please state what practical acts of legislation are necessary to revive the 
shipping interests. 

Mr. Nelson. All laws prior to 1812 should be remodeled—laws passed at that time 
nnd prior thereto are very injurious upon shipping. We should have a right to pur¬ 
chase ships wherever we desire. Just after the Crimean war I was in London; 
there were a large number of steamers in the docks, owned by doctors, dukes, clergy¬ 
men, &c. I could have purchased a ship there for a mere song, had it not been for 
our laws. I came to New York and asked the collector, Mr. Maxwell, if I could not 
buy the ship Francois, then in England. He said if I could swear that there was no 
foreigner interested, directly or indirectly, in any manner in regard to that property, 
I could buy it. The Germans came in and bought that very ship, and that formed 
the nucles of the German shipping trade. If we had the opportunity that the Brit¬ 
ish have to-day in constructing vessels, we should have “Great Easterns” now cross¬ 
ing the Atlantic. The British have always been backward in making these advances, 
and we are way behind them now.. I believe in abolishing the ship commissioners’ 
law. 

Mr. Cox. You mean as to hiring seamen? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir. They have no more right to hire seamen than you have. 

The Chairman. You think it is unconstitutional? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir. I don’t think it will stand the law. 

The Chairman. There is an easy way to test it. 

Mr. Nelson. I suppose there is. 

Mr. Cox. You think it is disastrous to shipping? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir. I never used to j>ay blood money. We had choice of the 
crews before this shipping commissioners’ bill was passed. 

The Chairman. How many vessels did you own in 1871 ? 

Mr. Nelson. About 7 or 8 ; in 1859-fiO about 19 vessels. 

The Chairman. Here in New York ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. What inconvenience arose to you from having crews shipped in 
accordance with the provisions of the shipping commission? 

Mr. Nelson. We had to go away up town to select a crew, and we had nothing to 
say about it. Sometimes they were,very inefficient people. 

The Chairman. Why did you have nothing to say about it ? Is there anything in 
the law which prevents a captain from selecting a crew ? < 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir. The law says you must go to one place. It is as absurd, as 
if the law compelled you to go to one store for your groceries. 

The Chairman. A captain can take a crew to the office and ship them ? 


62 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Nelson. Yes; the men are there, and lie takes them. 

The Chairman. He can take his own men there and ship them. 

Mr. Nelson. I should not allow my captain to go around the city taking men to an 
office; it is not a part of a captain’s business. 

The Chairman. Why can’t he get his crew there as well as in any other place ? 

Mr. Nelson. Because we are obliged by law to go to one place. 

The Chairman. It is the place where all men go to ship ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir; he has to go there; the law makes him. 

The Chairman. If the law says so, why is not that the place ? That brings the 
master and all the men that can be shipped together. 

Mr. Nelson. The shipping offices, have a certain number of men to select from. 
We should not be compelled to go to one place. It is our money we are paying, not 
that of the federal government or State. Thirty or forty vessels are leaving port in 
one day, and being limited to the selection of crews, you can readily see that the in¬ 
convenience is very great. In England the shipping act is connected with the gov¬ 
ernment. I ought to have the right to say who I shall have. I would not own a 
ship where I am obliged to go to the captain at a certain office and ship my men. 

Mr. Cox. What does “blood money ” mean ? 

Mr. Nelson. Why, it is giving money to hoarding-house keepers for shipping men, 
drunk or sober. It is paid to get sailors to ship when they are scarce. 

Mr. Cox. Who pays it ? and what for ? 

Mr. Nelson. It is paid by the sailor boarding-houses, and the shipping agents are 
mixed up in it. 

Mr. Cox. Who gets the money ? 

Mr. Nelson. I don’t know. 

Mr. Cox. Does the ship owner ever get it ? 

Mr. Nelson. I don’t know ; in the case when I paid it it went to the credit of the 
ship. In regard to ship owning there is too much interference. 

Mr. Cox. Go over the law in detail, and state what you would do to relieve shipping. 

Mr. Nelson. We want federal protection in regard to pilotage. We are subject 
here in New York to piracy instead of pilotage. I would like to see a law that would 
allow every State having maritime jurisdiction to have pilots free, and I would 
he quite willing to give the State the opportunity of furnishing these pilots, making 
the State responsible for the damage caused by them. At present if vessels are run 
ashore the owners are not compensated. 

Mr. Candler. You have your insurance. 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir; but insurance is so high that we can’t pay it. Insurance now 
on sailing vessels is 12 per cent. 

Mr. Vest. What is the tax on tonnage here in New York ? 

Mr. Nelson. Thirty cents a ton per annum. 

Mr. Dingley. More than the tonnage tax abroad ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir; it may be a little more. The tonnage at New York, as near 
as I could find out, is greater than at any port in the world, except San Francisco 
and Calcutta. Wharfage is so excessive here in New York that agents think they 
can’t bring their ships to this port. 

Mr. Dingley. Was not our tonnage tax less than that of England last year ? 

Mr. Nelson. Probably it was, very slightly. We have no light-house dues here. 

Mr. Vest. You speak about a tonnage tax. How are ships taxed here : by the 
State ? 

Mr. Nelson. They are taxed as personal property, but under the State law now 
they are exempt altogether. 

Mr. Cox. Don’t shippers ever give in their returns on shipping as personal prop¬ 
erty ? 

Mr. Nelson. Not that I know of. We had a ship going to New York for three years, 
and I can’t see why we should pay a tax on it in the port of New York. 

Mr. Vest. You mean to say that corporations used to pay this and individuals did 

not ? 

Mr. Nelson. I do not know what they did. It would be more likely to come under 
the cognizance of the State. I never heard of any individuals paying the tax. 

Mr. Candler. Do you think a change in our navigation laws so that ship-owners 
would be allowed to get ships wherever they found them cheapest would tend to in¬ 
crease the amount of tonnage in the carrying trade under the American Hag ? 

Mr. Nelson. Not immediately. Not until we get this high protection off this 
country. \\ hen we get our tarifl down to a proper point, probably within live years, 
we may be able to go into ship-owning more. 

Mr. Candler. Then you don’t think it would help us? 

Mr. Nelson, ^es, sir; but not just at this time. Our money has been invested in 
other branches. We have withdrawn it from this class of property. It would take 
some time to change them back, but as soon as we saw a better percentage on prop¬ 
erty we would go into it. With a change in the law, banks and capitalists will loan 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


68 

money when they see that they ean get an adequate return for it. You cannot induce 
capitalists to put money in ships now; there is no profit in it. It will take some 
time to get it back from other properties. Our merchant marine is nothing to-day. 

Mr. Candler. Do you think that if there was a drawback on everything that en¬ 
tered into the running of a ship, and the law for consul fees, and shipping seamen 
and advance wages were repealed, that we could run our ships here as cheap as they 
do in England ? 

Mr. Nelson. I should say that in the course of five years we might. 

Mr. Candler. You do not believe in drawback on the materials which enter into 
the construction of a ship? 

Mr. Nelson. No, sir; because it would require a horde of officials, and there would 
be dishonesty right straight through. 

Mr. Candler. Sometimes a merchant is engaged in the South American trade and 
he is in the habit of chartering a vessel. If he could take advantage of the oppor¬ 
tunities of the English market would it not lead him to purchase ships for his own 
trade ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir. I should like to have an interest in some line of ships run¬ 
ning to Cuba. If you change the law so that capital can rest safely in a ship it 
would be well. 

Mr. Candler. Have not the laws always been as they are now ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir; formerly there was a large amount of money loaned on ships. 
In five years the Panama Canal will be through, and it will be a great incentive to 
Americans owning ships. 

Mr. Candler. The trade Avith Cuba has changed in freighting sugar? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Candler. Where do they get the steamships for this trade ? 

Mr. Nelson. For exigencies they get what they call English “ tramps.” I once 
went in an Austrian ship in the East India service which carried from 2,500 to 3,000 
tons cargo and burned 14 tons of coal a day. We can’t do business competing Avith 
that. In this company they now have eighty-three steamers. The Mediterranean 
swarmed with steamers. The A r essels around Russia and the Baltic carry freight, but 
there are none of our goods. 

Mr. Candler. You think the simple fact of ha\ r inga \ r essel run under the American 
flag and with American capital, and going to the different ports of the world, promotes 
commerce and the export trade ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir; we are completely isolated in this country now. I saAv some 
bales of manufactured cotton in China, and in India some California peaches and 
Chicago beef in cans, but it was a mere nothing. If we had a fair chance to-day Ave 
could manufacture cotton and Avoolens for the Avhole Avorkl. 

Mr. Dingley. All this has been caused by a denial of the right to purchase and 
give an American register to foreign vessels ? 

Mr. Nelson. That has much to do Avith it. 

Mr. Dingley. The legislation is the same uoav ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir; but there are certain causes Avhich haA-e come to render this 
legislation useless. If the commerce of the country was carried on in wooden ves¬ 
sels Ave would be just as well off as it is. 

Mr. Dingley. You mean to say that the rate of profit on capital to-day is greater 
than it was before the war ? 

Mr. Nelson. In certain cases the returns are much larger and the results are greater. 
What happened ten years ago does not bear on the case at all now. We are isolated 
noAV. 

Mr. Dingley. Is not our commerce larger uoav than eA*er before ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Dingley. Then why isolated ? 

Mr. Nelson. I am speaking of our oavu goods that Ave manufacture here. You find 
nothing but the crude article throughout the world. 

Mr. Cox. Would it be an advantage to you to buy an iron sailing ship abroad ; and 
Avhat Avould be the price per ton of this class of ship ? 

Mr. Nelson. About sixty dollars. I would not want to buy a ship at present until 
I could get my capital out. We must have a law, so that capital can be invested in 
tonnage and be properly secured. I have stated to you hoAv there is no security now 
at all. 

Mr. Cox. You cannot loan money nowon ships, collateral or otheiuvise ? 

Mr. Nelson. No ; I would not loan to a party, taking a ship as collateral, but I 
would reverse matters. 

The Chairman. Under the present law there is no security in loaning money on a 
vessel, and you recommend a change in the law so that you can buy a vessel in for¬ 
eign markets. In that very respect suppose the law- was changed, could you loan 
money any better with that A T essel as security ? 

Mr. Nelson. No, sir. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


64 

The Chairman. In that direction I don’t see what your suggested improvement is. 
Then, when the principles of law become old we ought to have new principles. 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. I understand you to say that there is no security in vessel property 
because it can be taken from yon, how? 

Mr. Nelson. Under the present law. There is some means under the law by which 
a mortgage on the property is cut out. There was a party who bought a ship and 
received live thousand dollars from the seller. Because he could not complete the 
sale except one-eighth the party who owned the ship stood out, thinking he would get 
an advance from the seller. The party purchasing removed the ship to another 
dock, incurred a dock bill which got into a merchant’s hands, and the ship was adver¬ 
tised and sold. 

Mr. Robeson. Then under the laws there are such proceedings in rent against a 
ship and you think they ought to be changed to that extent at least ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir; you cannot get capital to come into this business. 

Mr. Robeson. The second proposition is that you be allowed to buy wherever 
cheapest. These two things you think would remedy the evil ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir; they would tend towards it. 

Mr. Robeson. You think we are not going to compete with the manufacturing of 
Europe unless we produce ships cheaper than they do ? 

Mr. Nelson. No, sir; of course not. 

Mr. Robison. Are we going to compete with them by removing protection to our 
manufacturing ? 

Mr. Nelson. No, sir. 

Mr. Robeson. How can you cheapen manufactures here so that we can compete 
abroad? 

Mr. Nelson. By cutting olf fifty thousand officers and doing away with your min¬ 
isters abroad. Practice economy in your government. 

Mr. Robeson. How will the cutting oft' of the expenses of the government cheapen 
the cost of manufactured articles ? 

Mr. Nelson. If we can cut our expenses down to $125,000,000, we make just so much 
less revenue, and we can collect on whisky and tobacco enough to run the government ; 
$75,000,000 cut off would get our burden down until it would not be very hard to 
bear, and we could compete. 

Mr. Robeson. What burdens have manufacturers to bear in the way of taxation 
now ? Do they suffer from the whisky tax ? 

Mr. Nelson. Yes, sir, largely; four-fifths of the revenue now comes from whisky 
and tobacco under our tariff laws. We want competition. 

Mr. Robeson. In what ? 

Mr. Nelson. With the rest of the world, carrying manufactured articles for sale 
abroad. 

Mr. Robeson. You propose to increase the carrying trade of this country by mak¬ 
ing it a depository for crude articles for the foreign trade ? 

Mr. Nelson. No, sir; I said nothing of the kind. 

Mr. Robeson. Your complaint was that you saw nothing but crude articles abroad 
which amounted to a mere nothing. I want to know how you are going to increase 
our exports of manufactured articles ? 

Mr. Nelson. We want to have all the interests working to supply the world. 

Mr. Robeson. How would you do that? 

Mr. Nelson. By reducing the revenues and expenses of our government and com 
ing down to a simple basis, and in that way we can reduce our import duties. Put 
up mills in the South and make cotton. 

Mr. Robeson. You would buy machinery abroad ? 

Mr. Nelson. No, sir ; I find a great deal of machinery in Mexico. 

Mr. Robeson. Can’t you buy as cheaply for South Carolina as Mexico? 

Mr. Nelson. No, sir ; we have certain drawbacks on certain goods here. We have 
a drawback on tin, tobacco, and sugar. 

Mr. Robeson. Your idea is that we could get the carrying trade of the world 
largely by encouraging trade in our manufactured articles with the rest of the world? 

Mr. Nelson. You can only get the exportation of our manufactured articles by 
reducing the price of them. 

Mr. Robeson. Is there any other way of doing it? 

Mr. Nelson. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Dingley. Can that reduction be obtained in any other way than by reducing 
wages and labor ? 

Mr. Nelson. No, sir; labor and wages would be higher, because there would be 
more work to do. 

Mr. Dingley. Why cannot we produce iron as cheap as England can ? 

Mr. Nelson. We have extremes all the time; we have strikes, and are in a con¬ 
stant feverish heat. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


65 


STATEMENT OF DR. JOHN B. HAMILTON. 

Dr. John B. Hamilton, Surgeou-General of the Marine Hospital Service of the 
United States, addressed the committee on the subject of sailors’ disabilities. He 
said: 

There are certain conditions connected with the physical characteristics of the 
sailor that bear materially on the subject of the revival of American shipping. I 
will not take up your time by going into details, but will simply say tliatthere are three 
points to be considered. One is that about one man in five on board an American ship 
is American by birth. The rest are foreigners. Second. One-third of all the sailors 
that go to sea are physically disqualified from shipping. Third. The sailors’ board¬ 
ing-house and the advance system of wages is another cause forth is physical dete¬ 
rioration. A physical examination of these men as preliminary to shipment would 
relieve the Marine Hospital Service and would allow a diminution of the expenses of 
consuls at foreign ports, and would prevent many of the hardships resulting from 
the system of advance wages. Almost every shipmaster will tell you that when he 
leaves the port of New York as soon as lie is outside, one-third of the crew are 
“knocked up.” 

One will have a tremendous ulcer on bis leg, another will have syphilis, a tremen¬ 
dous bubo, or heart disease. One-third of the crew will thus be unfit for work, and 
the other two-thirds are compelled to do the duty, and the vessel is frequently dis¬ 
abled and lost from this cause. When a vessel comes into a foreign port these dis¬ 
abled men are then discharged. They receive three mouths’ extra pay, and the con¬ 
sul sends them into a foreign hospital where their expenses are paid by the govern¬ 
ment. They return in a vessel to this country, and $10 is allowed the captain for 
bringing them back. When they get here they are taken into the United States Ma¬ 
rine Hospital, where they are patched up, and they drift into the sailors’ boarding¬ 
house, and are shipped again for the sake of the advance wages. The removal of 
these advance wages would stop the incentive to shipment. In 1879 a circular was 
issued from my office offering free of expense the privilege of examination to sea¬ 
men. The shipping commissioners favored the circular. They endeavored to have 
men examined. Three or four crews were so shipped in New York, but it interfered 
with the u blood money” and with the advance wages. The shipping commissioners 
have reported that they were not allowed to have their men examined. The sailor 
boarding-house fraternity control the sailor market. The condition of their houses is 
not amenable to United States laws. There are sailor boarding-houses in this city 
fouler than the “ black hol«*of Calcutta,” and no decent man would be seen going in or 
out of one of them. When a sailing vessel arrives in port these runners hook on before 
she comes up to her berth. In nine cases out of ten they know the sailors and claim 
them. Once getting into the house ii is always managed so that the sailor is in debt 
and does not ship a free man. They eveo set upon him and beat him if he dares to 
go to another house on liis return. Regarding the abolition or reduction of the hos¬ 
pital tax, if the request comes from the sailor, there is no objection to its reduction. 
If there were no hospital tax there would be a direct tax upon the vessel. Justice 
Story decided (2 Mass. C. C. Rep., 541) that the charge for the care of a seaman 
taken sick in the course of a voyage was a tax upon the vessel, and this charge in¬ 
cluded the cost of the necessary medicines, medical attendance, and subsistence 
while sick. This decision was reaffirmed by Judge Yerkes in the court of common 
pleas of Philadelphia (April, 1882), who claimed that the hospital tax is supplemental 
to the general principle of maritime law, and does not supplant it. The number of 
men that have been relieved in the last decade is over a quarter of a million. No 
appropriation has been made by Congress for the direct support of the service since 
1875. The fund is nearly self-supporting. It has run behind the last ten years per¬ 
haps eight or ten thousand dollars per annum. There is now a balance on hand that 
was created, not by taxation, but by the sale of lauds and hospitals which were 
built before the war. Some of them were built when they were never wanted or 
asked for. By existing law the proceeds of their sale were turned over to the ma¬ 
rine hospital fund, and there is a balance of $137,000 at the present date. Last year 
we treated over thirty-six thousand sailors. Foreign sailors are admitted to the 
United, States marine hospitals by certificates and direction of the masters. The ex¬ 
penses for the 36,000 men treated last year were about $413,000. 

Dr. Hamilton submitted the following extract from a letter from the Secretary of 
the Treasury, William H. Crawford, in 1821, as bearing upon the reason for the in¬ 
crease of the tax from 20 to 40 cents per month: 

“ For three years past we have urged the propriety of doubling the fund. Our im¬ 
portunities have been without effect. The state of the Treasury forbids the expecta¬ 
tion that inattention to the excessive expenditure of money for the relief of sick and 
disabled seamen will be considered excusable by those who hold the purse-strings of 
the nation.” 

067 




o 



66 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Tlie Chairman. Please state how the hospital fund is taxed on a vessel. 

Dr. Hamilton. It is paid by assessment on the sailors. The vessel is subject 
through the master to the payment of the hospital money at the rate of 40 cent® 
per month, deducted from the wages of the men. It has been said that sailors pay 
|4.80 per annum. This is not correct. The average duration of employment of a 
sailor is seven months in the year. He pays seven-twelfths of $4.80 or $2.80 on the 
basis of 40 cents a month. If a reduction is made to 20 cents per month then he will 
only pay $1.40 per annum. In Canada the hospitals are supported by a tonnage tax 
of 6 cents per ton per annum and the deficiency, if any, is made up by an appropria¬ 
tion from the Canadian Parliament. They have thirteen hospitals and last year they 
treated altogether some fifty-five hundred patients. We treated thirty-six thousand 
hut they were not all American sailors. Under the law foreign sailors are admitted 
to the United States marine hospitals on the application of the master of the foreign 
vessel or of the foreign consul. The repayment to the Treasury on this account 
amounted to about $10,000. 

The Chairman. Is the tax twice as much now as before the war? 

Dr. Hamilton. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Why is that? 

Dr. Hamilton. Because the different commercial interests thought the tax should 
be increased to prevent the rejection of sailors who were entitled to receive the ben¬ 
efits and who were not allowed to enter hospital because the fund was not large 
enough to support them; Congress then made an annual appropriation of from $150,000 
to $300,000, when it was 20 cents a month for the support of the service. The 
expense of caring for the thirty-six thousand sailors last year was in round numbers 
$413,000. The expense of caring for the eleven thousand seamen, which were all that 
we treated in 1868, amounted to $446,000, showing a difference in the operation of the 
subsequent regulations which were adopted by reason of the law of 1875. 

Mr. Candler. The shipment of diseased and inefficient sailors, through sickness, 
&e., is very frequent ? 

Dr. Hamilton. Yes, sir: the examination of pilots under department regulations 
require that they shall undergo a physical examination of the visual organs only. It 
seemed necessary that it should be determined how many were color-blind. We ex¬ 
amined 2,090 men last year, of whom 63 were found color-blind. In the revenue ma¬ 
rine service there were 273 sailors examined for enlistment. Nineteen were rejected ; 
four for color-blindness, six for syphilis, one for paralysis, one for old age, one for 
aneurism, one for syncope, and one for heart disease. Fiyemen are very subject to dis¬ 
eases of the circulatory organs. Engineers and firemen should always be examined 
before shipment. 

Mr. Candler. What would you propose as a modification of the law ? What time 
would you suggest ? 

Dr. Hamilton. I would favor a change in the law requiring seamen to produce the 
surgeon’s certificate to the effect that he was in a perfectly healthy condition seven 
days previous to shipping. 

Mr. Candler. You believe in the examination by a surgeon and the aid of a certifi¬ 
cate ? 

Dr. Hamilton. Yes, sir; it is absolutely necessary to insure sound seamen. 

Mr. Dingley. Do the English laws impose any hospital tax upon their seamen? 

Dr. Hamilton. There is none at present, I believe, except in Canada. 

Mr. Dingley. Then, the English vessel engages its seamen without their being sub¬ 
jected to the charge of 40 cents per month or any charge for hospital tax ? 

Dr. Hamilton. The seamen do not pay it. The vessel pays it. 

Mr. Dingley. Under the American law the taxis imposed on the seamen. It is 
paid by the vessel and deducted from the seaman’s wages. As a matter of fact is it 
not true that American vessels have to pay about 40 cents more per month to the 
seamen that they engage than the English vessels have to pay, on account of that 
taxation ? 

Dr. Hamilton. No, sir; they pay exactly the same. The sailor market is regulated 
by the rate of wages at the particular port, and that rate is fixed by the Sailors’ 
Boarding-House Association for vessels of all nations. In different ports the rate of 
wages varies. In San Francisco the rate paid the sailors is larger than the r&te paid 
here. 

Mr. Dingley. Has the imposition of the hospital tax anything to do with the in¬ 
creased wages paid ? 

Dr. Hamilton. I don’t believe that if you should deduct 40 cents from a month’s 
wages that a ship-owner would get him for $12.60 per month if the rate were only $13. 

Mr. Dingley. You said that before the war the tax was 20 cents for every 
seaman, and the deficiency was appropriated out of the Treasury ? 

Dr. Hamilton. Yes, sir. 

In conclusion Dr. Hamilton submitted the following letter, which he had written to 
the Secretary of the Treasury upon this subject: 


AMERICAN .SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


G7 


PROPOSED REDUCTION OR ABOLITION OF THE MARINE-HOSPITAL TAX. 

A bill having been introduced into the Senate for the relief of shipping, &c., con¬ 
taining a provision for the abolition of the hospital tax, it was referred to this office, 
when the following report was made, under date of March 24, 1882 : 

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt, by reference, of Senate bill No. 
1402, for the relief of shipping, together with Senate miscellaneous document No. 
69, the latter being the memorial of Mr. E. A. Pike, concerning the reduction of 
taxes on coasting vessels, and in relation to section 3 of the said bill and certain 
statements oi the memorial, to be hereafter adverted to, to report: 

Said section reads as follows : 

“Sec. 3. That the assessment of 40 cents per month, authorized by section forty- 
five hundred and eighty-five of the Revised Statutes of the United States, shall not 
hereafter be collected from the master or owners of vessels engaged exclnsivelv in 
the coasting trade or in fishing.” 

The section of the statutes referred to is the section under which the hospital tax 
has been collected, and, if the bill be adopted as it stands, would seriously cripple 
the Marine-Hospital Service, unless Congress made regular appropriations for its 
support. Moreover, it would not accomplish the purpose of the bill, namely, the 
relief of shipping, as will be shown. 

So far as fishing vessels are concerned, I have to report that the hospital tax has 
never been collected from vessels engaged in the fisheries, as appears from the fol¬ 
lowing letter of Secretary Gallatin, under date of August 30, 1805: 

Treasury Department, August 30, 1805. 

Sir : Your letter of the 17th instant was duly received. Seamen employed in fish¬ 
eries are not expressly excepted from the payment of hospital money; but that pay¬ 
ment is confined to vessels licensed for the coasting trade and to vessels arriving from 
foreign ports. It results that a vessel exclusively employed in the fisheries, and 
which has not been during her voyage in a foreign port, is exempted, but she is not 
so exempted as a fishing vessel, but merely as being neither a coasting vessel nor 
arrived from a foreign port. 

It follows that every'vessel arriving from a foreign port is equally, liable to pay 
the hospital money, and must pay it on the principle fixed by the words of the law, 
viz, for the time which has expired since the vessel was last entered at any port in 
the United States. No exemption is made in favor of vessels which may have been 
during a part of that period employed in fisheries, nor can any deduction be made 
on that account by the collector. 

I have the honor to be, respectfullv, sir, your obedient servant, 

ALBERT GALLATIN. 

Daniel Coffin, Esq., 

Collector, Nantucket. 

It is, however, proper to state, in this connection, that vessels engaged in fishing 
during a portion of the year sometimes surrender their fishing license, and then take 
out coasters’ license for the remainder of the time, which, of course, renders them 
liable to the payment of the hospital tax, under the law. 

In the argument on this bill, which is contained in the memorial of Mr. Pike, it is 
stated that this tax “obliges the crew managing the vessel to pay a monthly tax to 
hospitals they seldom or never use, and this tax has been doubled in the last ten 
years. * * * The hospital tax, which is $4.80 annually to the sailor, should be 

removed altogether. The sailor in one of our coasting vessels pyys taxes at home 
like other citizens, and when sick he gets well when and as he can.” 

In the same document is attached a letter from Mr. Nutt, formerly collector of cus¬ 
toms at Eastport, Me., who states: • ‘ 

“ Hospital money was formerly 20 cents per month ; now it is 40 cents. 

“It is too much to try for, but there is no sense in the hospital tax. The true way 
is to treat seamen as men, collect nothing from them, and make no hospital provis¬ 
ion for them. The great portion of the fund is used up in maintaining costly build¬ 
ings and large salaries, and, like everything else, the Marine-Hospital Department 
is steadily laboring to enlarge its powers and the influence of its head. That and 
the Revenue-Marine Service should be abolished. They are of no earthly use to the 
people.” 

Statements follow concerning the fees collected in the Canadian port of St. An¬ 
drew’s for similar classes of vessels. 

As this matter seems to take the broader ground of involving the expediency of 
maintaining the hospital service, and in the speech of the Senator presenting the 
same, unfavorable comparisons were made between the American service and the 
Canadian hospital service, I addressed a letter to the deputy minister of marine and 
fisheries, Ottawa, Canada, as follows: 


68 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


[Unofficial.] 


‘‘March 10, 1882. 

“Hon. Wm. Smith, 

“ Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries , Ottawa, Canada: 

“My Dear Sir : If perfectly proper to do so, will you kindly furnish me information 
on the following points : 

“ 1. How is your hospital fund created ? 

“2. Have you special hospitals for seamen ? 

3. Is the tax sufficient to meet the expenses ? 

“4. How many seamen are annually treated? 

“ You will place me under many obligations if you can furnish me as soon as prac¬ 
ticable with the above information.” 

I received an answer, hereto attached, marked “A,” which shows that iu Canada 
a duty is collected from vessels arriving at port in all provinces except Ontario 
and Manitoba, and that vessels of greater burden than 100 tons pay 2 cents per 
ton three times in each calendar year, and vessels of 100 tons and under pay 2 
cents per ton once each year. The letter also shows that there are special hos¬ 
pitals for seamen in thirteen Canadian ports, and that the amount collected from 
vessels is not equal to the expenditure on account of seamen, appropriations being 
made by Parliament for the service. It will be noticed that the number of seamen 
treated amounted to 1,556 only, making an average treated at each hospital during 
the year of 119 patients, less than one man per day, and it is obvious that as there 
is little comparison between the Canadian carrying trade in general and that of the 
United States, so there is also little correspondence in the number of sailors treated. 
Not a single one of these hospitals would be maintained in the United States were 
there no more seamen to be cared for than appear in the annual Canadian reports. 
The receipts and disbursements in connection with the marine-hospital service of 
Canada for the last thirteen fiscal years show that the expenses have been $37,659.66 
in excess of the income. 

It is proper to invite your attention to the fact that under the Canadian law this 
tax is a direct tax upon the vessel owner; the American hospital-tax is paid by the 
beneficiaries. On this point 1 refer to the proceedings of the tenth annual meeting 
of the National Board of Steam Navigation, held in Washington, D. C., October 5 
and 6, 1881, and particularly to the statement of Mr. Nickerson, of the firm of F. 
Nickerson & Co., one of the largest shipping firms of Boston, Mass., as follows, when 
the question of change to an assessment by tonnage was under discussion by that 
body: 

“1 question the policy of a change of .the law as proposed in this matter of hos¬ 
pital dues in a particular locality, because as it stands the law applies to an ocean- 
steamer as it does to a tug or ferry-boat, whereas, if the change is made, we cannot 
make the sailor pay for what he is going to receive in future. At present he has the 
guarantee of receiving the benefit of what might be called ‘a life insurance 7 when 
lie gets sick, inasmuch as he is assured that there will be a means of taking care of 
him, but when you have made the tax a tonnage due, the boat-owners cannot prop¬ 
erly charge it to the sailor, and he is deprived of the guarantee which he previously 
had. At present we are virtually the agents of the government for the collection of 
the tax, as we simply hold it for the government, and, when occupying this relation, 
we must expect the government to take up and examine our books occasionally. 
While the abolition of the hospital tax might save us trouble and annoyance, we can¬ 
not ignore the right of the government to overlook our books, nor the duty devolving 
upon us to keep our accounts correctly.” 

Mr. Munger, who was the agent of the Tug-boat Association of New York, stated 
that he was in favor of an amendment by which ferry and certain other boats would 
be required to pay the hospital tax at a certain rate per ton, and he ventured the as¬ 
sertion “that at present the tax was paid by the owners.” His remarks, however, 
had application exclusively to tugs and ferry-boats, and, after some discussion of the 
subject, he withdrew his recommendation mentioned above. 

Captain Gould, president of the association, said: 

“ I am also of the opinion that there would be no remonstrance against an increase 
of the hospital tax. The men, as a rule, need this relief and they can hardly be made 
comfortable without it. 

“ It is also a fact that, as to perhaps nine-tenths of them, an increase of the tax, 
when they have the money to pay it, would save to them just so much money, which 
would otherwise be spent in dissipation.” 

Concerning the method of taxation, it is to be observed that the law of 1875 di¬ 
rected the Secretary of the Treasury to cause to be prepared a schedule oi v i u ,r the 
proportion of the crew to tonnage, and, after its preparation, hospital dues should 
be collected in accordance with the schedule, provided that nothing in the act should 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


prevent masters of vessels from retaining the amount from the wages of the men 
1 his, then, is the present law. It has, however, been inoperative from the fact that 
it has been found impracticable to prepare a schedule. Shortly after assuming 
charge of this office, in 1879, an attempt was made to prepare such a schedule. 
Boarding officers of the Customs-Revenue Service were directed to board all the 
vessels in their respective ports at the several customs districts for a period of two 
months, and report the same to the special agent of the district, who was directed 
to tabulate such reports, and make a general report to the Secretary of the Treasury. 
1 rom these reports a general schedule was prepared, which, on my suggestion, was 
submitted to the several collectors of customs throughout the United States for their 
opinions. On the receipt of the opinions, it was concluded to be impracticable to 
promulgate the schedule on account of the hardship it would work in certain cases 
and the evident failure to meet the intention of the law. The details of this action 
were published in the annual report of this service for the liscal year ended June 
90, 1880, pages 27-38 and 187-210. It will be seen from this report that there is no 
relation of the crew to the tonnage of the vessel; that the increase in the number of 
the crew on the one hand or its decrease on the other usually depends on the amount 
of the business and the character of its trade. But latterly, with the labor-saving 
appliances in use and the improved machinery, schooners with three or four masts 
are operated with a much smaller crew than formerly. 

A change in the method of taxation from the crew to tonnage having been found 
impracticable, the question then reverts as to whether the service should be abolished, 
for the bill under consideration appears to be a duplicate of a bill introduced in the 
House of Representatives and referred to the Ways and Means Committee, with the 
exception that the latter abolishes the marine-hospital tax from vessels engaged in 
the foreign trade, 'which, between the two, would have the effect of the entire aboli¬ 
tion of the Marine-Hospital Service. 

There has. during the last decade, been no complaint that the Marine-Hospital 
Service failed to meet the intention of its founders. Prior to that time it was, indeed, 
objectionable in many particulars, and many movements for its abolition and for 
Miangesin the system were proposed from time to time, as the various Congressional 
reports will show, and the invariable result of an investigation of this matter has 
been that the service has been improved and sustained. 

In regard to the statement of Mr. Pike, that “the crew pay a tax to hospitals they 
seldom or never use,” Ac., it will be observed by the last annual report of this serv¬ 
ice that relief was furnished 32,(513 patients, a number more than twenty times 
greater than those treated by the Canadian service, to which reference is made in the 
memorial. Moreover, the hospitals of this service are at a much greater distance 
apart than those on the Canadian border. Thus, there is one hospital in Maine, one 
at Boston, and an abandoned light-house fitted up as a refuge hospital in the harbor 
of Vineyard Haven, to which vessels repair in distress or during storms ; a temporary 
hospital at Fort Wood, on Bedloe’s Island ; and no other hospital on the entire At¬ 
lantic seaboard belonging to the Government until the port of Key West is reached, 
except a small one at Wilmington, N. C., recently occupied. There is but one on the 
Gulf, that at Mobile; but a single one on the Pacific coast, two on the Great Lakes, 
one on the Ohio River, and one on the Mississippi, to which it may be added that one 
will soon be erected, in accordance with an act of Congress, at Memphis, Tenn. At 
all the other ports the sailors are treated under contract with municipal hospitals or 
private boarding-houses, the detailed arrangements for which are given in the last 
annual report of this service, pages 20-28. 

It will also be observed that no appropriation has been made by Congress for the 
support of this service since the year 1875. 

In reference to the relief received by coasters, the statistics of this office show that 
the proportion is much larger than is commonly supposed ; for, in fact, the majority of 
sailors treated on the seaboard are from coasting-vessels, vessels in the foreign trade 
only sailing from the larger ports. 

The statement of Mr. Pike, that “the sailor in one of our coasting-vessels pays tax 
at home like other citizens, and when he gets sick he gets well when and as he can,” 
is scarcely a fair statement, although it may not have been the original intention of 
the law that many of these sailors should receive treatment at their own homes, yet 
such is the case ; but the majority of them are treated away from home. Thus, tak¬ 
ing cases at random, as reported from the smaller ports, we find that at Brunswick, 
Ga., for instance, from July 1, 1881, to December 31, 1881, thirty-live seamen were 
treated, seventeen of whom were from vessels belonging to Maine. November 23, 
1881, two seamen were admitted to hospital treatment, both from a vessel hailing 
from Maine; one remained until January 31, 1882, at a cost to the service of $175, 
when he was then furnished transportation to the Savannah hospital, that at Bruns¬ 
wick being simply a boarding-house. The other seaman is still under treatment, at 
a cost thus far to the service of $285. 


70 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


At Savannah, 212 seamen were admitted to hospital during the period named, of 
which number forty hailed from Maine. 

At the refuge hospital at Vineyard Haven seamen were admitted to hospital from 
forty ..vessels, eighteen of which hailed from Maine. During the same time thirty- 
seven'Were treated at the dispensary, fifteen of whom were from Maine. 

At Eastport, Me., of twenty sailors furnished office-relief, fifteen were from ves¬ 
sels hailing from Maine; and of four treated in hospital, all were from Maine. 

Of sixty-six furnished hospital-relief at Providence, R. I., seven men were from 
Maine; and of thirty-one furnished dispensary-relief, three were from Maine. 

At the port of Philadelphia the total number of seamen treated from July 1 to De¬ 
cember 31, 1881, was as follows: Hospital cases, 300; dispensary cases, 458. Of these, 
there were from coasting vessels as follows: Hospital, 272; dispensary, 427. 

The other ports furnish equally conclusive statistics as to the extent to which 
coasters avail themselves of the hospital accommodations. And in this connection it 
is to be remembered that under the general principle of maritime law laid down by 
Mr. Justice Story, in the case of Harden vs. Gordon et al ., 2 Mass., C. C. Reports, p. 
541, the charge for the care of a seaman during the course of a voyage is a lien upon 
the vessel, and in each of the cases above enumerated the owner of the vessel would 
have been obliged to give security for the board, nursing, and medical attendance of 
the sailors who were left under treatment in the ports named, a 

I have purposely omitted the larger ports from the above enumeration to avoid the 
possible imputation of unfairness in the statistics, for it is plain that the New 
England sailors visit New York and Boston much oftener than the smaller ports along 
the coast. If the principle be conceded as to the liability of the vessel for the care 
of seamen as above stated, it is self-evident that the bill will fail of its purpose, for 
every case treated in the course of a voyage would be a burden instead of a relief. 
The question then reverts to the proposition, shall the hospital tax be reduced ? In 
this connection the history of the service affords ample and conclusive evidence that 
it ought not to be reduced, unless Congress shall conclude to make annual appropria¬ 
tions to cover deficiencies. I refer particularly to the statements from the various 
Secretaries of the Treasury in relation to this matter. In a letter dated April 25, 
1821, Secretary of the Treasury William H. Crawford said: 

“ For three years past I have urged the propriety of doubling the fund. My im¬ 
portunity has been without effect. The state of the Treasury forbids the expectation 
that inattention to the excessive expenditure of money for the relief of sick and dis¬ 
abled seamen will be considered as excusable by those who hold the purse-strings of 
the nation.” 

The following circular was issued about the same period to collectors of customs: 

“1. That no seaman afflicted with mania or any other kind of incurable disorder 
be allowed the benefit of the hospital for any period, however short, and that if any 
such have been admitted they be immediately discharged. 

“2. That no seaman laboring under complaints not deemed to be incurable be per¬ 
mitted to receive relief for a longer time than four months. 

“ 3. That all disabled seamen who may be discharged from the hospital in pursuance 
of this instruction, and who do not belong to your port, district, or State, be con¬ 
veyed, by water, at the public expense, to the place of their nativity or domiciles, 
observing to notify the collector of the port that they are not to be received into the 
hospital. 

“4. That you do not permit the expenditures in your port for the relief and support 
of sick and disabled seamen, during any one year, to exceed the amount of the tax 
collected for tlie same period, unless you shall be*authorized so to do by this depart¬ 
ment.” 

Collector of Customs John Steele, of Philadelphia, under date of the 8th of Feb¬ 
ruary, 1821, wrote to the Secretary in relation to this matter, as follows : 

*• Permit me, lastly (with a view of providing a fund more adequate than at pres¬ 
ent for the relief of sick and disabled seamen), to recommend increasing the monthly 
deduction from their Avages to fifty cents instead of twenty. Though this measure 
might be somewhat grievous to men of temperate and economical habits, it would to 
those of opposite characters not only furnish a better fund for relief, but diminish the 
means of dissipation, which too often lays the foundation for rendering such relief 
necessary.” 

Collector of Customs Jonathan Thompson wrote the Secretary, under date of Octo¬ 
ber—, 1821, transmitting a statement of “ the receipts and expenditures of hospital 
money for the three-quarters of the year, by which it will appear we have expended 
more than received, notwithstanding we have been compelled to turn away upwards 
of thirty in one Aveek the last month. The applications in future will probably in¬ 
crease rather than diminish.” 

The inclosure to Avhicli he refers, among other interesting matter, states as fol¬ 
lows : 


a This principle has recently been affirmed in the court of common pleas of Philadelphia, by Judge 
Yerkes (April, 1882). 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


71 


1 here are many more reasons I could mention wliy the receipts of hospital money 
are so inadequate now to what they were twenty years past. If I had received every 
one who applied tor medical and surgical aid, and who had paid hospital money, I 
should not, for several years, have had less than ninety patients on my books. • 

I>ut, in compliance with my instructions, I am under the necessity of rejecting 
many who liaVe been exposed and actually have become the victims of an untimely 
death, and I am sure,, from what I have obtained from that class of men, there is not 
one who would have any objections to paying fifty cents per month if they could be 
admitted into the hospital when they are sick and disabled from foreign and interior 
navigation. There is no port in the United States that needs so much money to sup¬ 
port the marine hospital as the one in New York. 

“ 1 am, &c., 


“CHRISTOPHER PRINCE.” 


Captain Prince was the person designated by the collector of customs as the hos¬ 
pital inspector of New York. 

The collector at Baltimore, under date of August 18, 1821, stated: 

i hough upwards of one hundred patients have been discharged, and many refused 
admittance, yet indulgence to some that prayed for time has been allowed, in expec¬ 
tation that their friends, or, where there were none, that the muncipal power would 
be able to provide for them. There are but fourteen at present of that description 
whom I shall now cast upon the physician. 

let more. The several vessels of the United States that have lately arrived at 
Norfolk and Washington—the ‘Congress,’ ‘Peacock,’ &c.—have poured out a host 
of claimants upon us, who, rejecting the provisions made in those places, or being 
refused, or for unknown causes have hastened here and thrown themselves upon us. 
Can we, when the law expressly prescribes their right, refuse it? 

“But if there is no ‘general fund constituted, to be employed as circumstances 
shall require, for the benefit of sick and disabled seamen,’ if the relief here given is 
to be limited to the amount of tax here collected, then no more can be provided for 
here but those belonging to the port. The doors of the hospital must, then, be closed 
upon that great number who issue from the public ships, as well as all those who come 
from other districts; otherwise they will inevitably overgo the collections of the 
port. In compliance with your directions, however, it shall be rigorously performed. 

“The contract with the physician is made at Washington, and, by your leave, it 
may be suggested that a certain sum—the amount of collection here—shall be paid 
to him, and then he shall receive at his own risk those seamen who are sent by the 
collector. I have frequently groaned in perplexity upon this subject—between the 
injunctions of law, the obligations of duty, and the excessive demand upon our funds, 
which could hardly be reconciled—while I was still exposed to the disagreeable con¬ 
tentions on behalf of many refused the desired relief; nor have I been satisfied that 
I have done right in rejecting some applications to this miserable agency. 

“James h. McCulloch.” 


Secretary Levi Woodbury recommended the revision of the law and favored the 
increase of the tax and its extension to all classes of vessels, and, under date of De¬ 
cember 19, 1839, he reported to Congress that a change in the system of marine hos¬ 
pitals was expedient, and that the fund was not adequate to meet the ordinary de¬ 
mands upon it by those who had contributed to it; and, besides this, a large class of 
seamen not being obliged to contribute to it, were consequently debarred from its 
benefits and subjected to privations and sufferings. 

He then recommended that— 

“ The change most useful and appropriate would seem to be the extension of the 
hospital contribution or deduction to all seafaring people, and hence an enlarge¬ 
ment of the relief afforded, so as to include all of that description and to extend 
assistance in many cases of sickness of a chronic character, which, though appealing 
strongly to public sympathy, are now obliged to be entirely excluded. 

“ Such a change would not be felt oppressively as a tax, and would enable the au¬ 
thorities of the general government to save from distress and the ignominy of being 
treated as paupers a gallant and meritorious class of men whose great exposures and 
whose character, often so inconsiderate in moneyed affairs, call loudly for public 
protection.” 

He believed that the fund should be increased in amount 20 to 50 or 100 per cent., 
provided the necessities and comforts of the seamen appeared on trial to require it. 

It is apparent from the foregoing letters that when the hospital tax was fixed 
at 20 cents per month hospital relief was denied a very large portion of the sailors, 
while such is now not the case with those paying hospital dues. Still, a consider¬ 
able number of seamen apply for hospital relief and are rejected, the most of whom 
are from whaling and fishing vessels. The number of persons rejected, as being neither 
entitled to relief nor sick enough to require it, during the six months from July 1 to 


72 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


December 31, 1881, is shown by the records of this office to be 979—more than half as 
many as the entire number treated in Canada, where all vessels without exception paid 
the tonnage hospital money, a direct tax upon the vessel, from one to three times pei 
year. 

Coincident with the increase of the hospital tax in le/1, from 20 cents to 40 
cents per month, the regulations began to grow more liberal, and, from a regulation 
which admitted to the benefits of the service only persons from vessels then in port,, 
the benefits of the service have been extended to all bona fide seamen, without much 
regard to the time of employment, taking care, however, to exclude persons who 
were simply “ loafers ” or u vagrants.” But as marine hospitals are hospitals, and. 
not almshouses, there is still a lack of permanent provision for those who become 
incurably sick or permanently disabled in the line of duty. Many of these persons 
are not subject to the local poor-laws, and have, in fact, no home. 

One class of cases that come under the provisions relating to this service, and tor 
whom, if the tax were abolished, there could be no relief, except from local charity, 
are seamen taken from wrecked vessels. I transmit copies of three letters from col¬ 
lectors of customs in relation to cases of this kind, marked respectively “C, ’ ‘‘ H,’ r 
and “E,” which are fair types of this class. It is self-apparent that even the decision 
of Justice Story could not provide for this class, for in these cases there Avas no 
A r essel to tax. This service, however, authorized the relief necessary, which included 
medicine, medical attendance, food, lodging, and clothing. 

In this connection it is proper to say that no seaman in any port of the United 
States need fail of obtaining relief, if he apply for it; and if he does not need it, he 
is not only so much better off, being in the possession of sound health, but he may be 
sure that his contribution is applied to the relief of some worthy but disabled 
comrade. 

It is to be remembered, also, that the movement for the abolition of this tax does 
not come from the sailor, but from a person claiming to be a vessel-OAvner, although 
his name does not appear as such on the published list of merchant A essels of the- 
United States. 


There is still another point to be taken into consideration in this matter, and that 
is the fact that the hospital tax of 40 cents per month is paid only while the vessel 
is employed. The average period of employment of coasting Aessels has been esti¬ 
mated by those competent to make the estimate at seven months. 

The following statement from hospital tax paid at Eastport, Waldoborougli, and 
Machias, Me., in the month of February, 1882,shows the period of employment therein 
named, and the actual payments made, which may be taken as a fair representative 
of the United States coast, especially as Maine has been takeu by Mr. Pike in his 
memorial as the standard: 


Eastport, Me. ( February , 18S2). 


Xame. 


Schooner A. CL Brooks_ 

Schooner Hunter. 

Schooner Acta Allen. 

Schooner Chas. Sears. 

Schooner S. Augusta. 

Schooner F. Flint. 

Schooner S. Ford. 

Schooner L. B. McXichol. 

Schooner Clara Jane. 

Schooner Live Yankee ... 
Schooner New Brunswick 


Schooner Judith Anne . 
Schooner Maggie Belle. 

Schooner May Day. 

Schooner Lizzie Guptell 

Schooner Herald_... 

Schooner Billow. 

Schooner Brilliant. 

Schooner S. A. Osier_ 

Schooner Young Chief. 

Schooner Joy Bell. 

Schooner Harry Day... 

Schooner Victory.___ 

Schooner Cinderella.... 


No. of men 
employed. 


Reported time on the 
vessel. 


1 year .... 
3 months . 
2§ months 


Actual pay¬ 
ment of hos¬ 
pital tax. 


$12 


o2 

67 

76 


u 

4 

muutug.. 

3 months . 

A It 

4 16 

6 

3 mouths. 

2 02 

5 

U months. 

1 88 

(5 

fi mouths... 

6 72 

5 

4£ months. 

4 87 

4 

& month. 

75 

48 

28 davs. 

16 45 

ebruary). 

3 

4 month.. 

$0 43 

5 

1 year. 

17 10 

5 

14 years. 

21 50 

3 

14 months. 

10 63 

4 

11£ months. 

12 00 

5 

Hi months. 

18 82 

3 

124 months. 

9 40 

3 

3 months. 

1 00 

2 

1 vear. 

5 85 

5 

1 year. 

15 84 

5 

11 months. 

14 50 

2 

12| months. 

3 51 

2 

13 months. 

4 71 




























































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


73 


Machias, Me. (February). 


Xame. 


Schooner Annie Lee. 

Schooner Ella Brown.... 

Schooner Maud. 

Schooner Nicola 
Schooner Nettie Walker. 

Schooner Kinker. 

Schooner Clara E. Rogers 
Schooner J. B. Knowles. 

Schooner Keno. 

Schooner I’eiro. 

Schooner T. A. Stuart_ 


No. of men 
employed. 

Reported time on tlie 
vessel. 

Actual pay¬ 
ment of hos¬ 
pital tax. 

5 

4£ months. 

$5 97 

6 

11 months. 

14 03 

7 

7 months. 

10 49 

9 

5§ mouths. 

17 59 

6 

4 months. 

S 56 

3 

11 months. 

8 32 

5 

4 month s. 

4 23 

6 

4 months. 

1 55 

5 

4 months. 

6 13 

5 

3 months.. 

60 

6 

2 months. 

3 68 


It thus appears that, in point of fact, noue of the sailors pay $4.SO per annum, hut. 
on the contrary, they pay about seven-twelfths of that amount, for which they re¬ 
ceive an ample equivalent. 

It is not true that the fund is wasted on the salaries of medical officers and the 
erection of hospitals. The salaries paid the medical officers proper are not in excess 
of those paid similar grades in the Army and Navy, and the officers named number 
thirty-six. The acting assistant surgeons receive salaries from $100 to $1,000 per 
annum, according to the nature and extent of the service required. Reference to the 
Official Register of the United States, vol. 1 (1881), pp. 237 to 239, shows the salaries 
paid to he much less than would be expected to be paid for professional services in 
general, and it is found in practice that physicians’ bills when not contracted for by 
the year largely exceed the rate fixed by the department, and for which they are 
willing to serve at a regular annual compensation. 

In this statement I have not thought proper to go into an extended and detailed 
report of the other duties performed by the officers of this service outside of the 
legitimate work of attending sick and disabled seamen. This will appear, however, 
upon a statement which is herewith transmitted, marked “ B,” and from which it 
will be seen that the Marine-Hospital Service is the medical service of the Treasury 
Department, including Revenue-Marine, Life-Saving, and Light-House Services, and 
has latterly been charged with the examination of pilots for color-blindness. Of 
these, persons in the Revenue-Marine Service and pilots on steam vessels pay hos¬ 
pital dues. 

Very respectfullv, your obedient servant, 

JOHN B. HAMILTON, 
Surgeon-General , M. //. S. 

To the Hon. Ciias. J. Folgeb, 

Secretary of the Treasury. 


STATEMENT OF CAPT. MICHAEL J. DALY. 

Capt. M. J. Daly, of New York City, appeared before the committee on the subject . 
of free ships. He said : 

I have been to sea nearly thirty years. I lost my ship sailing from San Francisco 
to New York by fire at Calcutta. I am afraid I shall have to go to England and sail 
under the British flag. I think we ought to be allowed to go and buy our ships where 
we please, aud sail them under our own flag. I am under instructions to purchase a 
ship abroad to be owned by American money entirely, and sail under the English flag, 
and as nearly as possible under American principles. 

The Chairman. What kind of a ship ? 

Captain Daly. Say a 1,500 ton ship. 

The Chairman. Iron ? 

Captain Daly. Yes, sir; iron ships get the preference in almost every port in 
the world. They get 50 cents a ton more for carrying cargo. It makes a very great 
difference, and, more than than, it can sail much more cheaply. Her running expenses 
and her repairs are a great deal less. 

Mr. Candler. Can you sail a 1,500 ton American ship cheaper than an Englishman t 

Captain Daly. Yes, sir ; I think I could beat an English ship. Production here is 
cheaper. There is much more in economy than anything else. An Englishman usea 
quite as much food as we do, but they never have as much to eat as we have. We 
have a better class of seamen and a better class of cooks. 

The Chairman. Are there many American seamen ? 

Captain Daly. Very few. 

The Chairman. What proportion of the crew under the present arrangement would 
be American sailors? 


































74 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Captain Daly. About one-fifth; four or five out of twenty-five. 

The Chairman. Do the British ships furnish as good material for the sustenance 

and food of the crew as American ships ? 

Captain Daly. No, sir. It is a cheaper kind. Not as good as ours generally. 

The Chairman. If it is a cheaper kind how can you furnish yours cheaper than 
England ? 

Captain Daly. Well, we do it. 

Mr. Candler. You are going to try to buy a ship in England ; a new ship r 

Captain Daly. A ship six or seven years old. 

Mr. Candler. How long did the Lloyds warrant a new iron ship? 

Captain Daly. From twenty to a hundred years. They are subject every foui 

years to an inspection. # , 

Mr. Candler. Compare the rate of insurance on an iron ship with that on a wooden 

ship. 

Captain Daly. It is much less on a wooden than an iron one. 

Mr. Cox. How much less ? 

Captain Daly. I am not prepared to say. I think that is one of the questions that 
can be answered by merchants here. 

Mr. Cox. By whom are you commissioned to buy a ship ? 

Captain Daly. I am not at liberty to say. 

Mr. Cox. Can you buy an iron ship cheaper here than in England ? 

Captain Daly. No, sir. 

Mr. Cox. We would like to know whether ships cost more in England than here. 

Captain Daly. A 1,500 ton ship can be bought for about £12,000, or$60,000, in Eng¬ 
land, or about $40 a ton. 

Mr. Dingley. What would an iron ship cost ? 

Mr. Cox. You are a native of New York ? • 

Captain Daly. No, sir; I was born in Ireland. 

Mr. Cox. How would you instruct your Representative from the eleventh ward to 
vote on this whole question ? 

Captain Daly. I would instruct him to give me liberty to go to England or wher¬ 
ever I could buy cheapest. 

Mr. Cox. You think I had better vote to allow you to buy a ship at your pleasure ? 

Captain Daly. Yes, sir. I am suffering a very great hardship by being compelled 
to sail under the British flag. 

Mr. Cox. Is there anything you would like to state about the tonnage tax or other 
burdens ? 

Captain Daly. I would like to abolish the three months’ extra pay in foreign ports. 

Mr. Cox. Any other tax ? 

Captain Daly. Yes, sir. I think we could stand the consular dues if it was neces¬ 
sary to support the consul. The three months’ extra pay is a very great hardship. 

Mr. Cox. How so? 

Captain Daly. From the fact that it is a great deal for a man to pay. It is apt to 
demoralize a ship’s crew. They are disabled, and when they go into a foreign port 
they go into a hospital and get into the hands of the consul, and he exacts three 
months’ extra pay from the captain. At Manilla my whole crew deserted. They were 
picked up by the Spanish Government and turned over to the American consul, who 
kept my sailors in prison thirty days, each day giving them a lengthy trial. That 
ship was without a crew for a number of days under a hot, broiling sun. My crew 
were lying there at the disposal of the American consul, and I paid for their board. 
I think this is a very great hardship. 

Mr. Robeson. But the consul should have kept them from deserting. He should 
have sent them back on board the ship immediately. 

Mr. Cox. Do you know anything about this tonnage tax ? 

Captain Daly. Yes, sir; I have paid it. It is a war tax. I paid $900 for the priv¬ 
ilege of carrying the American flag. 

Mr. Dingley. Is our tonnage tax heavier than that of England ? 

Captain Daly. Yes, sir; I believe it is. 

Mr. D ingley. Is not their tax more than ours? 

Captain Daly. Yes, sir; I would propose to levy light dues upon other nations just 
as they do upon us. 

Mr. Dingley. You say it would cost more to run your vessel under the American 
laws than under the English laws; are there more charges? 

Captain Daly. Yes, sir; there are more, but we sail our ships with much less 
labor. 

Mr. Dingley. Are there greater obstacles in running a vessel under the American 
laws than under the English laws? 

Captain Daly. Yes, sir; a friend of mine owns an interest in thirty-one sailing 
ships, all under the British flag. He is an American tradesman here in New York. 

Mr. Candler. Under a mortgage ? 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


75 


Captain Daly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. D ingley. Is there a large amount of English tonnage actually owned by Amer¬ 
icans to-day ? b 

C aptain Daly. Yes, sir; and there are a great many that I don’t know of. 

Mr. Cox. Is the Williams and G uion line owned by American money ? 

Captain Daly. \es; very largely. They run under the American flag. They put 
two or three under the English flag, and I understand that that line is very largely 
owned in America. 

i he Chairman. What proportion of the English shipping is owned by Americans? 

Captain Daly. I don’t know’ for certain. 

The Chairman. Give me something like an estimate of what proportion of the 
value of vessels is owned by Americans. 

Captain Daly. I have no idea what the amount would be. Perhaps one-eighth. 
Most of the English ships that come in here are not owned here. 

I he Chairman. To our own American vessels engaged in the carrying trade you 
would add about one-eighth foreign ? 

Captain Daly. Yes, sir; I think the American seamen suffer more than any other 
men. They cannot sail under the English flag so well. 

Mr. Robeson. Who is the gentleman who owns an interest in thirty-one ships un¬ 
der the English flag ? 

Captain Daly. He is a sailmaker. 

Mr. Robeson. What is the amount of his interest in each ship? 

Captain Daly. I do not know. 

Mr. Robeson. Does he own that interest for the purpose of profit in the carrying- 
trade, or for the purpose of doing a business here as a sailmaker? 

Captain Daly. Partly both. He said his money pays him better in these ships as 
an investment. 

Mr. Robeson. He supplies them wdtli sails here ? 

Captain Daly. I presume so. 

Mr. Robeson. You don’t know his interest ? 

Captain Daly. No, sir. Perhaps he owns one-fiftieth of each ship, putting it as 
low as possible. It would cover $100,000, or about .$'.1,000 in each ship. I sailed a 
ship from San Francisco for about ten years. An English ship could ship her crew 
cheaper there and for a much less advance than I could. 

Mr. Dingley. Why ? 

Captain Daily. I don’t know. One reason, I suppose, is because an Englishman, 
when he gets to Liverpool, will be paid oft', whereas, by American laws, the consul 
forbids you to advance any money on salaries. If I am bound from Liverpool to Hong- 
Kong, I become responsible for three months’ extra wages on my salaries. 

Mr. Dingley. About one-fiftli of the sailors engaged on American vessels in the 
foreign trade are Americans; what proportion of sailors on English vessels engaged 
in the English trade are English citizens? 

Captain Daily. About two-thirds, I should think. I once sold a ship in which 
I had a fourth interest at Hamburg. The American consul compelled me to pay one 
month’s extra pay to every man, myself included. 

The Chairman. Is it the law? 

Captain Daly. I don’t think so. 

The Chairman. What consul was that ? 

Captain Daly. His name was Wilson. 

Mr. Cox. Give your judgment to this committee, whether or not, outside of the 
California trade, there is any more capital invested by Americans, in an exclusive 
foreign trade, under foreign flags, than under our own flag. 

Captain Daly. I believe there is. 

Mr. Cox. Can you give any reason for your belief in that ? 

Captain Daly. The only reason is that we have not the privilege to buy ships 
where we have a mind to. 

Mr. Dingley. What proportion of our foreign trade is still in wooden vessels ? 

Captain Daly. I don’t know, but the quicker the law is amended the better. 

At 12.45 the committee took a recess until one o’clock. 

STATEMENT OF HON. H. C. CALKINS. 

November 20, 1882. 

The committee resumed its session at one o’clock. 

Hon. H. C. Calkins addressed the committee on the subject of free ships. He 
said : 

I represent here to-day a committee appointed by two conventions who met here last 
fall to present the shipping interests to Congress. That committee was composed 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


76 


of gentlemen interested in ship-building and ship-owning in New York City, Boston, 
Philadelphia, but not Baltimore. They represented millions of dollars in the coast¬ 
wise and foreign trade, on the Pacific and Atlantic, running to Mexico and the West 
India Islands. I am here before you as chairman of that committee. 1 represent 
myself as a consumer of iron, copper, and lead, that enter largely into the construc¬ 
tion of ships. My whole life has been identified with ship-building, and to a certain 
extent ship-owning. Some 12 years ago I had the honor to be a niembei of the com¬ 
mittee, known as the Lynch Committee, on the decline of the shipping interests. W e 
went over nearly the same ground you are covering now. I here has been great ad¬ 
vance in iron ship-building since that time. As representative of that committee 
we were opposed to the introduction ot free ships to this country. I here was noth¬ 
ing said about rebate, consequently I cannot commit the committee, but for myself 
I am opposed to a rebate. 1 believe we have no more right to bring into this country, 
free of duty, materials entering into the construction of a ship, than the ship itself 
as a whole with all its labor on it. I prefer to work American material to working for- 
reign material, because it is the production of American labor, and, as an American, 
I believe in American products entering into American ships. I believe in a relict in 
the way of bounty. That idea is in the bill of the Lynch committee. It was a bounty 
on the tonnage ; so much a ton for construction ; so much a ton for running. I be¬ 
lieve in subsidies because that is what bounties amount to. 

Mr. Cox. What is a subsidy ? 

Mr. Calkins. I would consider a subsidy to be money taken out of the public treas¬ 
ury and paid to a steamship line—a certain amount for a round trip for carrying the 
mails of the United States Government, with privilege of carrying freight. England 
paid the following amount for carrying the mail to the United States : (Reading from 
p. 214 of Report 28, Forty-first Congress, second session, on the “ Causes of the reduc¬ 
tion of American tonnage.”) “ In December, 1868, a contract was made with the 
managers of the Cunard line to carry a mail twice a week to the l uited States,, every 
Saturday to New York, and every Tuesday to Boston, for £70,000 per annum.’ •• In 
1869 a contract was made with the managers of the Inman line to carry one mail each 
week to New York, for £35,000 per annum.” “In December, 1867, a contract was 
made with the Cunards to carry a mail every fourth week from Halifax to Bermuda 
and St. Thomas for £19,500.” I think the taxation on our shipping interests should 


be removed. 

Mr. Cox. How much would the removal of these burdens help? 

Mr. Calkins. I would favor the removal of all taxation possible that can be put on 
our shiping interests; everything that is an expense to any vessel entering into the 
foreign trade that can be legally and properly abolished. 

Mr. Cox. Would you recommend that we should make a rebate, or buy ships abroad 
freely ? 

Mr. Calkins. I would not recommend buying any ships abroad at all. Under our 
present laws there is not a capitalist in this country who would buy ships abroad if 
they had an opportunity to run them under an American flag. 1 have never 
known any one who had money to put into ships to advocate free ships. If it was 
for the interest of the Williams and Guion line to run their ships under our dag, and 
they could do it as cheaply as under the English flag, they would be before-tliis com¬ 
mittee asking for it. 

Mr. Cox. Are you in favor of a rebate ? 

Mr. Calkins. I am opposed to rebate, because I prefer using American material. 

Mr. Cox. You are a consumer of copper, iron, &c. Do you want to buy these 
cheaper for your purposes? 

Mr. Calkins. Yes, sir; I would prefer to. 

Mr. Cox. Would you buy the ship cheaper? 

Mr. Calkins. Yes, sir ; I have not the least doubt if the gentlemen who are engaged 
in iron ship-building were positive that the door would not be thrown open to all the 
world against our own professions, they would invest thousands of dollars in their 
plants, but under the present circumstances they would not be justified in doing it. 
I would allow $15 a ton for all vessels engaged in the European trade as a bounty on 
their construction for ten years; for the Brazilian and South American trade, $15 ; for 
the Pacific and China trade, $15; for the California and Australian trade, $15 ; and 
for the West India Islands, except Cuba, $10. On steamers running on all European, 
China, and Australian lines, carrying the mails, I would allow a bounty of $4 a ton, 
for each round trip, for five years, and for the balance of the time $2.50 a ton : in the 
West India trade$la ton, and in the Island of Cuba 50 cents, and all taxation possi¬ 
ble taken off of steamers. 

Mr. Cox. Why don’t we build ships cheaper in this country than in Europe 1 

Mr. Calkins. Because labor is cheaper there. In Europe a blacksmith gets 12 cents 
an hour wages; in this country 30 cents. In Europe a boiler-maker gets 16 cents; 
here 30 cents ; engineers there 14 cents ; here $3 a day ; plumbers here $3.50 ; there 
$2. As a protective Democrat I wouldn’t have free ships. I would continue our pres- 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


77 


tnt industries and keep them alive and build our oWn ships, and in a few years we 
would be worked down so that we could compete with foreign markets, keep out 
cheap labor. We can’t take care of the poverty of England and our own too. 

STATEMENT OF MR. JOHN ROACH. 


Mr. John Roach appeared before the committee. He said: 

Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen : I would like to postpone answering the questions 
which I saw in the public press, and with your permission will take them up later on. 
It is very difficult to carry in the memory a series'of facts and figures bearing on this 
subject. I shall confine myself to facts, and will leave no opportunity for the con¬ 
tradiction of a single assertion I may make, and although some of them may appear 
strange, I hope to be able to convince you of their truth. It is generally supposed 
that a repeal of our navigation laws with a right to buy ships in the cheapest market 
(which means the English market, as that is the only one that could furnish them) 
would restore our merchant marine on the sea. 

Tins is believed by many honest, sincere, thinking men who have a desire to see it 
done, but the fact is the very reverse of that. 

In the last ten years I have built $10,000,000 of iron screw steamers in the foreign 
trade, so that my interest in ship-building is something. I have never seen a single 
man who had put his money in the foreign trade come here before this committee 
and ask for free ships: they know better; they have invested their capital and com¬ 
menced by building one ship this year and next year another; but this cry has come 
altogether from visionary men who have nothing invested in ships and never expect 
to have. When you see a man that would not put a dollar into ships advocating free 
ships, depend upon it it looks very suspicious. 

I am a sliip-builder, and I do not fear to adA r ocate the building of our ships at 
home, for I do believe—and history proves the assertion—that no nation in the world 
can ever become a great ship-owning nation until she builds her own ships. The ton¬ 
nage of the world in 1880 consisted of 49,524 sailing vessels and 5,462 steam vessels, 
with a total tonnage of 19,842,237 tons, valued at $1,125,171,750. There are 14,000,000 
tons of sailing ships to-day engaged in the carrying trade of the world and 5,000,000 
tons of steam. We build the cheapest and best sailing ships in the world, and yet 
our foreign carrying trade is dying out. 

What, then, let me ask, has the first cost of the ship got to do with this—the in¬ 
strument by which 14,000,000 tons of the carrying trade of the Avorld is performed. 
We do not carry our share of it. Why ? That is something that free-ship men ought 
to answer, but they never do. I will give you mine: dear capital, dear labor in sailing 
the ship, and high taxation. We never can compete with cheap capital, cheap labor, 
and low taxes. But let us see where this shipping belongs and how divided among 
the different nations. England carries more than one-half of the whole carrying 
trade of the world under her flag ; the rest is distributed among the other nations of 
the world. Germany has 1,161,341 tons and France only 931,000 tons. These two 
nations have free trade in iron and ships, and yet Germany carries only one-eighth and 
France one-tenth of the carrying trade of the world. What is the reason ? Those 
nations have cheap capital to buy ships, cheap labor to run them, and yet they do 
not succeed. Germany, France, and Italy are to-day repealing the very laws that 
some visionary people are here asking you to recommend. 

Those nations had been fooled by the same sophistry talked of here until Great 
Britain has almost entire control of the ocean. 

More than two-tliirds of the steamships that France, Italy, and Germany own to¬ 
day have been built in Great Britain, and yet we see the results to those nations. 
But, in the face of all this, these people come here and ask you to adopt the very 
same policy. No, gentlemen, it was not cheap ships that gave England the position 
she occupies to-day. It was a policy of encouragement to ship-owners to run their 
ships, a policy that made the business of running ships remunerative. She has given 
more aid to her merchants for this purpose than all the governments of the world 
beside. 

It was not the policy of a day, a week, or a year, but of a century. The nation 
started out with a determination that she should rule the sea. She applied legisla¬ 
tion, diplomacy, even war for the accomplishment of this object. She has paid to 
her steam tonnage in that time over 140,000,000 of money. Now, gentlemen, when 
you understand what she sacrificed in order to accomplish the position she holds to¬ 
day you will learn to ask the question on what conditions she will surrender it? 

When she began this policy in 1854 her steam tonnage was 304,554 tons, to-day it 
amounts to 3,137,000 tons; then herearnings were $120,000,000, to-day it is $346,000,000. 
She has made that stride in steam while other nations have taken to sail. 

The policy of England gives confidence to capital. You can borrow money there 


78 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


on a ship as cheaply as upon a house or lot. You caunot do it here because we have 
no settled, stable, fixed policy. 

Previous to the introduction of steam into the merchant marine of the world and 
into our navies, there was no nation that could excel us on the ocean, either as ship¬ 
owners or as a naval power, but since its introduction we never had a policy for the 
merchant marine or the Navy. 

We want a policy to-day that will give capitalists security. Great Britain has 
driven our ships and the ships of other nations from the sea, and while France, Ger¬ 
many and Italy are remedying their difficulty, we stand idle and do nothing. 

Great Britain has notified the world that her merchant marine was a part of the 
government, and thus encouraged her merchants to put their capital into ships. I 
am ready to maintain that it is impossible for any nation to oppose England on *the 
sea, while her capitalists, when needed, are backed by the government. 

The Chairman. You had better make your statements in writing and send them 
to the committee. 

Mr. Roach. 1 have here copies of contracts made by the British Government with 
steamship companies paying them large bounties for opening new markets, and carry¬ 
ing the mails, and guaranteeing them a return of 8 per cent, on the capital invested; 
this, of course, was done to enable them to cut down freights and break up opposition. 

The Royal Mail Packet Company own thirty-nine steamers, and when they com¬ 
menced building ships they had given to them annually by the government, .$2,500,000. 
These steamers were running in the same waters, and carrying goods from China and 
the Pacific. Yet with England’s cheap labor, cheap money, and consequently cheap 
ships, it was found necessary to put them under contract and pay 50 per cent, on the 
whole capital invested, to keep the vessels ailoat. A parliamentary commission was 
appointed with directions to investigate the books of the company, and a law was 
finally passed to have the books taken charge of by the treasury department, and to 
guarantee the company 8 per cent, dividend over and above the running expenses ; 
and thus Great Britain saved those thirty-nine ships from stopping. Of the earn¬ 
ings over 8 per cent, the government received one-third and the company two-thirds. 

Another contract with the Royal Mail Steamship Company was made. The com¬ 
pany could not find capital to put in their ships, but the British Parliament came for¬ 
ward and advanced them £45,000 sterling or$250,000 to get their ships insured. The 
contract was extended, uew ships were put afloat, the guaranteed dividend of 8 per 
cent, was declared and was paid as long as it was found neeessary. 

When E. K. Collins, of New York, started his great line of ships, he got a contract 
from our government, and a promise that it would sustain him, but it failed to keep 
that promise. The American flag was hauled down, and Mr. Collins was ruined. 
That was the style of encouragement given by our government to sustain its mer¬ 
chant marine. 

The English Government gave a much heavier contract to Mr. Cunard, and when it 
expired it was immediately renewed. 

In the line of steamers in the foreign trade in which I am interested, the law com¬ 
pels me to carry the mail without my consent at one cent a mile, while France was 
carrying the mail at $6.25 a mile. And yet we are asked why we don’t put the Amer¬ 
ican flag on the ocean ? The Havana, the Mexican, Brazilian, and Pacific mail lines 
of steamers have engaged in the foreign trade forty steamers, and last year they were 
compelled to carry the mails by this compulsory law at one cent per mile. In 1882, 
a steamship line sent a bill to the Post-Office Department for carrying the mail between 
New York and Havana, the sum of $1,454 was collected while that same company 
paid out $554.30 to bring the mails from quarantine to this city, leaving a balance 
of $869.75 for carrying the United States mails, or less than one cent per mile. 

The ocean carrying trade is now in a very peculiar condition. We hear a great 
deal just now about monopolies, and when we hear of a man getting control of an 
American railroad we think lie has a great monopoly, and perhaps he has ; but those 
great English lines of steamships are nothing less than a continuation of those great 
trunk railway lines; they are not single ships belonging to one man; they are great 
corporations with an immense amount of capital invested, and to contest the trade 
with those lines is like asking for capital to run a competing line parallel with one of 
our great trunk railroads. The fact that since 1830 Great Britain has paid in con¬ 
tracts to her steamship lines $236,000,000, and that she will continue to do it, if 
needed, because these contracts make the ships a part of her navv, is sufficient to 
deter any man of sense from venturing his capital in such a hopeless competition. 

Mr. Cox. What is the average percentage of duty on bolts, angles, iron, rivets 
and nuts that enter into the construction of iron vessels ? 

Mr. Roach. That is a part ot our tariff to which I have not given much considera¬ 
tion. 

Mr. Cox. If the duties were taken oft' all materials referred to, could you make an 
iron or steel ship as cheaply as you could abroad ? 

Mr. Roach. No, sir; I tried the experiment before we had a rolling mill to make 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


19 


large beams and angles necessary to construct a sliip, and I found it would require- 
double the amount ot capital to carry on tbe business. The loss of time would coun¬ 
teract any advantage that would arise from it. Commissions, freights, interest, &c., 
would increase the cost sufficiently to make a profit for the Clydeship-builder. Ido 
not think that a single sliip-builder would avail himself of the opportunity to buy 
iron in Scotland for the purpose of building ships in America. 

Mr. Cox. Supposing materials to be free of duty, for how much more or less per 
ton gross register can an iron steamship be built in this county or abroad. 

Mr. Roach. It the material, such as plates, angles, &c., are put in the most ad¬ 
vanced form for building, then the construction of the hull will cost about half 
the finished ship, leaving the other half for working the material all along from the 
mi»e until it is ready to be used in building. 

Mr. Cox. Are you in favor of having materials free of duty that make up a ship ? 

Mr. Roach. No, sir, I am not. If we had to depend on getting material from Eng¬ 
land there would not be au iron ship-yard in America. 

Mr. Cox. If the materials come in free why not the ship ? 

Mr. Roach. Very true, sir ; but I have not admitted that the material should come 
in free, for if they do, one-half the labor connected with the construction of the ship 
comes in free, and to that extent American labor is injured. And yet I contend we 
are the greatest free traders in the world, because 90 per cent, of this very ship is 
labor, and when the laborers come here, duty free, they want a square American deal, 
and will not sell their labor here for the same price as on the Clyde. 

Mr. Cox. Supposing materials to be free of duty, and. our ship-builders could build 
ships here as cheaply as foreign builder, should they not be willing to do so ? 

Mr. Roach. Yes, sir ; if they could build them. 

Mr. Cox. Are you opposed to buying ships abroad ? 

Mr. Roach. Yes, sir; no man owning iron ships advocates free ships. I signed two 
contracts to build two sailing ships at $75 a ton, the parties with whom I made this 
contract finding it in their interest to have them built at home. 

The statements favoring free ships are made by men not in the business and who 
do not want ships at any price. I am one of the largest owners of ships in the foreign 
trade in this country to-day, but I do not know of a man appearing before your com¬ 
mittee having any interest in the foreign trad’e who advocates free ships. 

Mr. Cox. Where does this clamor for free ships come from ? 

Mr. Roach. From England, sir; that is the only nation we could buy ships from; 
and you will not be surprised at her deep interest in this matter in view of her geo¬ 
graphical position ; her roadway is the water; she cannot afford to be hemmed in, nor 
can she afford to place her manufactured goods, which amounted last year to 
$4,000,000,000, not one-eighth of which is consumed at home, under any other national 
flag than her own. 

Mr. Cox. Would not England allow her shipping trade to go under our flag ? 

Mr. Roach. No, sir; not if she could avoid it. Not even the carrying of her for¬ 
eign mails would she commit to any other power. She would rather pay double to 
her own merchants for the service. Her supremacy on the ocean must be maintained 
at any cost; she would not be the England she is without it. And yet we—this grand, 
broad, free America—so rich in resources of the mine and the forest, will accept from 
her the boon of building our ships for us. 

Mr. Vest. In what year did we begin building steamships in this country ? 

Mr. Roach. There were a few iron vessels built many years ago, yet there were no 
large vessels built until 1870. 

Mr. Cramp (interrupting). There were some sea-going vessels built before the war, 
but not very large ones. 

Mr. Vest. Have Americans continued to improve in this species of ship-building 
since 1870 2 

Mr. Roach. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Vest. Has the manufacture of them increased the construction of iron steam¬ 
ships here ? 

Mr. Roach. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Vest. Then how has it decreased since the panic of 1873 ? The Treasury De¬ 
partment reports a gradual falling off since 1873. The following is the table given: 


80 AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 

Honnage of iron , sailing, and steam vessels built in the United States from 1868 to 1880, 

inclusive. 


[From annual reports of the Register of the Treasury.] 




Year ended June 30— 


Sailing Steam 
vessels, vessels. 


Total. 


1868. 

1860. 

1870. 

1871. 

1872. 

1873. 

1874. 

1875. 

1876. 

1877. 

1878. 

1879. 

1880. 


Tons. 


1, 03!) 
679 

2, 067 


44 


Tons. 

2, 801 
3, 545 
7, 602 
13, 412 
12, 766 
26, 548 
33, 097 
21, 632 

21, 346 
5, 927 

26, 960 

22, 008 
25, 538 


Tons. 
2, 801 

4, 584 
8, 281 

15, 479 
12, 766 
26, 548 
33, 097 
21, 632 

21, 346 

5, 927 
26, 960 

22, 008 
25, 582 


Mr. Roach. It must be a mistake if it is represented as having fallen off. The iron 
steamships iu the foreign trade from 1870 to the present time has increased over 600 
per cent. I have, myself, built 8,500 tons of steamships in the foreign trade, and they 
are all afloat except two. 

Mr. Vest. Do you mean the California trade ? 

Mr. Roach. Yes, sir; between California, Australia, Mexico, China, and Japan, 
west coast of South America and Brazil, and the Havana trade. 

Mr. Calkins (interrupting). There is one line alone in the foreign trade that has 
had 20,000 tons built. 

Mr. Roach. I will have built from the first of March this year to the first of March 
next year 32,000 tons of iron steamships, 15,000 tons of which are for the foreign 
trade. 

Mr. Vest. Are these tables submitted by the Treasury Department correct ? If so, 
with increased facilities, and building more cheaply, why is it that the American 
ship-yards have not built more ? Why a falling off between 1874 and 1880 ? 

Mr. Roach. There was a great deal of inland or coasting tonnage built in that 
time. We have built over 150,000 tons of coastwise steamers. Probably there is no 
nation in the world that has as good ocean freight steamers as the United States, ex¬ 
cept Great Britain. 

Mr. \ est. Up to 1881 we had turned out 00 steamers; are they not included in that 
table ? 

Mr. Roach. I cannot tell you that, sir. 

Mr. Vest. I wish to get at this; notwithstanding all the disadvantages under which 
we have labored with our navigation laws, the manufacture of American iron steam¬ 
ships has gradually increased from 1872 to 1880. Now the official table of the Treasury 
Department shows a falling off. Why is this so ? 

Mr. Roach. I cannot account for the statement of the government; I built the 
ships. 

Mr. Calkins (interrupting). This official statement comes up to 1880. Since then 
there has been a large number of steamers built. 

Mr. Vest. Did you not state in several places in your pamphlet that notwithstand¬ 
ing all the adverse taxation and other adverse circumstances, still the independent 
industry has increased from 1872 to 1880? 

Mr. Roach. Certainly I said so. In that time our trade in foreign steamships has 
increased over 400 per cent. 

Mr. Vest. Is that not utterly inconsistent “ with these official tables ?” 

Mr. Roach. I cannot account for that statement; but I can give you names of the 
vessels with their tonnage. There is no question, sir, but the increase I speak of is 
correct, for I built many of the ships, and I know Mr. Cramp and Mr. Gauze, of Wil¬ 
mington, built many; and the increase I speak of from 1870 to 1880 is over 400 ner 
cent. * 

Mr. \ est. Are you in favor of subsidizing American ships alone; and are you op¬ 
posed to any subsidy for foreign built ships ? 

Mr. Roach. No, sir; I am not in favor of subsidies of any kind. I am in favor of 
carrying American mails in American ships, and the contract given to the lowest re¬ 
sponsible bidder. 

Mr. Cox You believe in paying large sums for postage, and carrying the mails to 
American built ships ? • 























AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


81 


Mr. Roach. No, sir; treat the American ship in the foreign trade as you treat the 
American railroad or steamboat, that is all I advocate. What we want is a policy 
that will enable our merchants to run the ships after they are built. I would be in 
favor of a general law on the subject. 

Mr. V est. Do you propose to pay additional postage rates to these steamship lines, 
as the English do ? 

Mr. Roach. I believe in investigating the matter, and limiting it to one-half of 
what other nations have done when their carrying trade was in a similar condition 
to ours. I believe in passing a general law and throwing the whole thing open to 
competition. 

Mr. Vest. Do you confine that competition to American built ships? 

Mr. Roach. Most certainly, I do, sir. 

Mr. Vest. Has France confined competition to her own ships ? 

Mr. Roach. Certainly. 

Mr. Vest. Has Brazil confined it to her own ships? 

Mr. Roach. Brazil has never built ships; she has bought them. France is differ¬ 
ently situated from America. Siie has no facilities for building, because she has not 
the iron. The country that has not the iron, and has no natural resources, I should 
say would require one kind of law, while we, who have the iron buried in our soil, 
require another. France says fio her citizens, u Build your ships at home, and we 
will give you double the bounty we should if you built them abroad.” 

Mr. Dingley. Can you not furnish copies of these foreign contracts ? 

Mr. Roach. I will do so, sir, and send them to Washington. 

Mr. Roach submitted the following additional tables and statements: 

T/<€ world’s tonnage. 


Character. 

No. 

Tonnage. 

Estimated 

value. 

Sailing vessels.| 

Steam vessels.. 

1 

49, 524 
5,462 

14, 317,430 
5, 524, 797 

$572, 692, 000 
552,479, 700 

54, 986 

19, 842, 227 

1,125,171,700 


The shipping interest of the four principal nations is shown as follows: 


Nations. 

! 

No. 

Tonnage. 

Value. 

Total ships. . . . . . . 

54,986 
21, 610 
6,566 
3, 421 
3, 247 

19, 842, 227 
9,161, 205 
2,684, 943 
1,168, 341 
931,152 

$1,125,171, 700 
574, 359, 420 
143,944, 380 
61, 953, 660 
57, 359,220 

England. 

America ... . 

fJ-Armany....... 

France.... 



A comparative table of steam tonnage gives the following: 


Nations. 

No. 

Tonnage. 

Value. 

Total steamships...... 

5,462 
3, 216 
516 
. 220 
275 

5, 524, 797 
3,465,187 
609, 111 
253, 667 
335, 219 

$552,479,700 
346, 518, 700 
60,911,100 
25, 366, 700 
33, 521, 900 

England. 

America... 

Germany..... 

France..... 



0G7 


i 








































82 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


Great Britain's tonnage and earnings. 


[All sea-going tonnage.] 


Years. 


Sail. 


1854 

185* 

1856 

1857 

1858 

1859 

1860 
1861 
1862 

1863 

1864 

1865 

1866 

1867 

1868 

1869 

1870 

1871 

1872 

1873 

1874 

1875 

1876 

1877 

1878 

1879 

1880 
1881 


Steam. 






Tons. 

3, 880,126 

Tons. j 
304, 559 


3, 907, 888 
3, 919, 422 

379, 020 


385, 038 


4, 075, 245 

416, 132 


4,136, 846 

451, 047 


4,156, 270 

434, 987 


4,134, 390 

452, 352 


4, 230, 793 

504, 698 


4, 324, 057 

536,134 


4, 655, 984 

595,773 i 


4, 847, 303 

695, 575 , 


4, 845,142 

821,731 


4, 817, 595 

874, 415 


4, 770, 989 

899,361 | 


4, 798,178 

900, 599 


4, 687, 706 
4, 506, 318 

940,721 


1,111,375 


4, 305, 112 

1,317,548 1 


4, 145, 888 

1, 536, 075 


4, 024, 581 

1,711,787 


4, 043, 955 
4,144, 504 
4,195, 430 
4,199, 999 

1, 868, 359 


1, 943, 197 


2, 002, 538 


2,136, 361 


4,178, 789 
4, 013,187 
3, 799, 221 
3, 639, 890 

2, 313, 332 

. 

2, 508,102 

. 

2, 720, 557 

. 

3, 001, 377 

« 


v a « 

CD * P 

-g ® ©js 

3 §i)«f 

'.5 P M >> 

X 3 3 

W '— 


$ 120 , 

125, 

125, 

133, 

137, 

136, 

137, 
143, 
148, 
161, 
173, 
182, 
186, 
187, 

187, 

188, 
196, 
206, 
218, 
229, 
240, 
250, 
255, 
265, 
278, 
288, 
300, 
316, 


000 , 000 
000,000 
000, 000 
000 , 000 
000, 000 
000 , 000 
000,000 
000, 000 
ooo, ooo 
000,000 
000 , 000 
000, 000 
000, 000 
000,000 
000, 000 
000, 000 
000 , ooo 
000,ooo 
ooo, ooo 
ooo, ooo 
ooo, ooo 
ooo,ooo 
ooo, ooo 
ooo, ooo 
ooo, ooo 
ooo, ooo 
ooo, ooo 
ooo.ooo 


MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES OF THE UNITED STATES AND GREAT BRITAIN. 
Compared progress from 1850 to 1880. 


Tlie United States. Great Britain. 


Years. 

Hands 

employed. 

Value of prod¬ 
uct. 

i Increase. 

Hands 
; employed. 

Value of prod¬ 
uct. 

Increase. 

1850 ... 

792, 000 
1, 385, 000 

$1, 019, 000, 000 
1, 886, 000, 000* 


. 



1860 . 

85 

1 3, 900, 000 

$2, 930, 000, 000 


1865 . 

1, 900, 000 

2, 600, 000, 000 

69 

4, 250, 000 

3, 000, 000, 000 
3, 210, 000, 000 

.... 

1870 . 

2, 707, 000 

4, 232, 000, 000 

62 

4, 500, 000 

.09 

1875 . 

3, 800, 000 

5, 800, 000, 000 

35 

4, 800, 000 

3, 560, 000, 000 

.10 

1880 . 

5, 250, 000 

7,500, 000,000 

30 

5, 200, 000 

3, 800, 000, 000 

.09 





































































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


83 


Vessels built by John Roach <£• Son, from 1873 to 1882, inclusive. 


Name. 


City of Waco. 

Erie. 

Colima. 

Colon. 

Garden City... 

City of San Antonio. 

George W. Elder. 

City of Guatemala.« 

City of Panama. 

State of Texas.. 

Berks.. 

Perkiomen . 

City of Peking. 

City of Tokio. 

City of Chester. 

City of Sidney. 

City of San Erancisco. 

City of New York. 

Rio Grande. 

Newbern. 

Alert.. 

Alliance. 

City of Savannah. 

City of Macon. 

City of Washington. 


Western Texas. 

Panama Railroad Tug 

Niagara. 

Saratoga. 

Gate City . 

City of Columbus. 

Saratoga. 

City of Para .. 

City of Rio de Janeiro 

Oregon. 

Manhattan. 

City of Alexandria 

Elias. 

Santiago. 

Colorado. 

Juan Mir. 

City of Augusta........ 

Yosemite. 

Breakwater. 

Newport. 

Columbia. 

Louisiana. 

Guadalupe... 

Cygnus. 

Ceplieus . 

Sirius. 


Walla Walla.. 

Umatilla. 

Willamette ... 
San Marcos 
Guyaiulotte ... 

Roanoke. 

San Jose. 

San Juan. 

San Bias. 

Tallahassee... 
Chattahoochee 
« 



ci 

<X> 

I £ 


1873 

1873 

1873 

1873 

1873 

1873 

1874 
1874 
1874 
1874 
1874 
1874 
1874 

1874 

1875 
1875 
1875 

1875 

1876 
1876 
1876 

1876 

1877 
1877 
1877 


1877 

1877 

1877 

1877 

1878 
1878 
1878 
1878 
1878 

1878 

1879 
1879 
1879 
1879 
1879 

1879 

1880 
1880 
1880 

I 1880 
1880 
1880 
1881 
i 1881 

I 1881 
1881 


1881 

1881 

1881 

1882 

1882 

1882 

1882 

1882 

1882 

1882 

1882 



i. 



1,549 

750 


840 
1,450 
1, 569 


1, 549 
553 
1, 035 






2, 906 
2,714 





. 


.1,490 
1, 490 


5, 080 
5,080 i 


1,106 


2. 566 
'846 
1,246 
1,246 
2, 029 
2, 093 


20, 427 


1,121 

75 


1, 997 
1,992 


l 


2, 335 
1, 575 


2, 870 
450 
1, 045 


2, 722 
2, 840 
2, 839 
857 
857 
993 


27, 333 




2,131 
2,131 
i 2,264 
2, 839 
2,140 
2,140 


2, 700 
2, 700 


! 3,017 
3,019 
3, 019 


. 


. 









2,618 



30, 433 

50, S60 






2, 265 
2, 265 



. 


1 2,426 
3, 532 
3, 548 







2, 480 
240 
2, 359 

........ 


425 . 



. . . 

2, 735 j. 

. I . 

1 1 




..■_ 

22, 275 

50, 800 
49, 608 


100, 468 





. 




I • 



2, 010 
2, 010 
2, 010 




I 












































































































































































81 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


Vessels built by John Roach $ Sow—Continued. 



Name. 


Nachochee. 

Pilgrim . 

Now in progress ; will be completed by April, 1883: 

Three Brazil steamers. 

Two Galveston steamers. 

One Cnba steamer.. 



c 

.5 


aJ 

cT 


u 

bl. 

. 

ct 

X 


r- 

— 1 

* 

Q 

c 


H 



1882 

1882 

2, 700 

3, 500 



6. 600 





5. 900 



2,450 . 


31.145 15,080 100,468 

- 46,225 


Total tonnage 


146, 693 


Vessels built by the Harlan f Hollingsworth Co. from 1870 to 1882, inclusive. 


Name. 


Leopard . 

Wyanoke. 

Hutchinson. 

■Whitney. 

Roanoke. 

Wm. Crane. 

Helen. 

Transfer. 

Old Dominion. 

Acapulco, foreign. 

Granda. foreign. 

Peerless. 

Gussie. 

Gen’l Whitney. 

John Hopkins. 

Westover. 

Pennsylvania. 

Richmond. 

Hampton. 

City of Chelsea. 

Shirley. 

Ranger.. 

Seaboard. 

Chowan. 

Tangier. 

Lone Star.. 

New York. 

Dauntless. 

Delaware. 

Protector. 

Algiers.. 

Morgan City.,. 

Columbia. 

Flushing. 

Carolina . 

B. S. Ford. 

Columbia. 

Aransas. 

Jas. M. Waterbury. 

Republic... 

Jose Gonzales. 

Man- Morgan. 

St. Johns. 

Virginia. 

Cooper’s Point.. 

Rockaway ... . 

Oregon and California R. R. Co 

Decatur H. Miller. 

Newtown. 

Arctic. 

Mischief. 


Year. 

Tonnage. 

1870 

609 

1870 

2, 067 

1870 

1, 435 

1871 

1, 338 

1871 

531 

1871 

1, 418 

1871 

350 

1872 

101 

1872 

2, 223 

1872 ’ 

3, 000 

1872 

3, 000 

1872 

299 

1872 ; 

998 

1873 : 

1, 849 

1873 

1,471 

1873 

577 

1873 

220 

1873 

1,438 

1874 

624 

1874 

273 

1874 

576 

1874 

1,100 

1874 

662 

1875 

459 

1875 

589 

1875 

2, 255 

1875 

2, 255 

1875 

301 

1875 

371 

1875 

158 

. 1876 

271 

1876 

2, 271 

1876 

664 

1876 

581 

1877 

984 

1877 

378 

1877 

389 

1877 

1,157 

1877 

412 

1878 

1, 285 

1878 

30 

1878 

370 

1878 

1,098 

1879 

990 

1879 

389 

1879 

520 

1879 

440 

1879 

2, 296 

‘1879 

450 

1879 

394 

1879 

1 111 





























































































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


85 


Vessels built by the Harlan Hollingsworth Co. —Continued. 


Name. 


Canton. 

Albany. 

Long Beach. 

Excelsior. 

Falcon. 

Pilot. 

City of Worcester.. 

Ida. 

Gaston. 

Baltic. 

Wexorat. 

Beverly. 

Jamaica. 

Baltimore. 

Chicago.. 

Avalon.. 

Corsica.. 

Excelsior. 

City of Jacksonville. 

Finished next £ Eastern Shore. 

January. { Northern Pacific It. It. 


Two ships not measured and two not finished. 

Vessels built by William Cramp Sons from 1870 to 1882, inclusive. 


ear. 

Tonnage. 

1880 

1,179 

1880 

1.380 

1880 

519 

1880 

774 

1880 

119 

1880 

189 

1881 

2, 490 

1881 

589 

1881 

847 

1881 

399 

1881 

439 

1882 

439 

1882 

435 

1882 

^ Measured 

1882 

5 elsewhei'e 

1882 

558 

1882 

368 

1882 

3, 264 

1982 

481 

1882 


1882 

I 


64,496 




0, 000 


.. 04,496 


Tonnage. 


Date. 


1870 

1871 

1872 

1873 
1873 

1873 

1874 
1874 
1874 
1874 
1874 
1874 
1874 

1874 

1875 

1878 

1879 

1879 

1880 
1880 
1880 
1880 
1881 
1881 
1881 
1881 
1881 
1881 
1881 
1881 
1882 


Name. 


ci 

o 

O 


3 

bf 

3 


Clyde. 1,182 

G.' W. Clyde. | 1,032 

Pennsylvania.i. 

Ohio.. 

Indiana.. 

Illinois.. 

Columbus.. 

Reading. 1, 283 

Harrisburg. J 1, 283 

Lancaster.! 1, 283 

Williamsport. 1, 283 

Allentown. 1,283 

Pottsville. 1,283 

Terror . 1,500 

Saint Paul . ! 900 

State of California No. 1.| 2, 26G 

State of California No. 2. 2, 266 

Zabiaca.-. 

Chalmette.' 2,983 

Josephine. 365 

Corsair. 237 

Stranger. 237 

Coraccas.— 

Cetus ., 857 

Pegasus. 857 

Perseus. 857 

Tamus. 017 

Allegheny. 2, 014 

Berkshire. 2, 014 

City of Puebla. 

Queen of the Pacific. 2, 727 

V r alencia... 

Tacoma . 3,100 

San Pedro . 3,100 

Oceanic S. S. C. 

Oceanic S. S. C. 

Vessel. ;, 00 

37, 609 


3,104 
3,104 
3,104 
3,104 
1, 583 


1,050 


1,589 


2, 550 


1, 600 


3, 000 
3, 000 


Remarks. 


Philadelphia and Liverpool, foreign. 
Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Havana and New York, foreign. 


26, 788 


San Francisco and Alaska. 
Do. 

Do. 

Russian navy, foreign. 

New York and New Orleans. 


New York and Venezuela, foreign. 


Baltimore and coast. 

Do. 

New York and Mexico, foreign. 

San Francisco and Oregon. 

New York and Venezuela, foreign. 
San Francisco and Oregon. 

Do. 

San Francisco and Sandwich Islands, 
foreign. 

Do. 





















































































































86 AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 

Rates of wages paid in the ship-building yards, on the Clyde, Scotland, and by them furnished 

to Edward Young, esq. 

[Rates given are for November, 1882. Ten workmen of each class.] 


Class of workmen. 


Machinests (average). 

Pattern-makers. 

Joiners. 

Blacksmiths. 

Blacksmiths’ helpers. 

Ship carpenters. 

Boiler-makers. 

Riggers... 

Painters. 

Furnace men. 

Copper and tinsmiths. 

Holders-on (average). 

Teamsters. 

Founders. 

Finishers and dressers (average).. 

Riveters (average). 

Fitters . 

Drillers. 

Rivet-heaters (boys). 

Helpers and laborers (average)..... 
Iron finishers and other mechanics. 


Total weekly wages of ten men. each class, of yards on the Clyde. 


Weekly 

wages, 

1 man. 

Weekly 
wages, 
10 men. 

$6 

92 

$69 

20 

7 

92 

79 

20 

7 

5(5 

75 

<50 

7 

80 

78 

00 

4 

32 

43 

20 

8 

10 

81 

00 

8 

40 

84 

00 

7 

24 

72 

40 

7 

98 

79 

80 

4 

10 

41 

00 

7 

02 

70 

20 

4 

81 

48 

10 

5 

76 

57 

60 

7 

68 

76 

80 

6 

87 

68 

70 

7 

29 

72 

90 

7 

02 

70 

20 

7 

14 

71 

40 

2 

16 

21 

60 

4 

09 

40 

90 

7 

56 

75 

60 



1, 377 

40 


Average wages paid at the works of John Roach Sp Son , at New York, employing one thou¬ 
sand two hundred men. 


Class of workmen. 



Machinists, per day. 
Boiler makers, fitters 

Flange turners. 

Riveters. 

Caulkers. 

Laborers, boiler shop 

Pattern makers. 

Loam molders.. 

Green sand molders . 

Foundry laborers- 

Blacksmiths. 

Blacksmiths’ helpers 

Heavy forgers. 

Furnace helpers. 

Carpenters. 

Ship-joiners.. 

Coppersmiths. 

Plumbers. 

Brass molders. 

Riggers and laborers. 
Brass finishers. 


$4 

00 

$2 

00 

3 

25 

2 

80 

3 

25 

2 

75 

o 

75 

2 

60 

2 

40 

2 

00 

1 

80 

1 

40 

4 

00 

2 

00 

3 

60 

2 

00 

3 

40 

2 

00 

2 

30 

1 

50 

4 

50 

2 

50 

2 

30 

1 

80 

10 

00 

7 

00 

3 

20 

1 

70 

2 

75 

2 

30 

3 

50 

3 

00 

3 

50 

2 

70 

4 

00 

3 

00 

3 

00 

2 

50 

3 

00 

1 

70 

3 

50 

1 2 

30 






























































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


87 


Hates of icages paid to workmen in the ship building of John Roach f Son, at Chester, Fa., 

during month of November, 1882. 

[Rate calculated, for ten workmen of eacli class.] 


*--—-■— ---#- 

Class of workmen. 

W eekly 
wages, 

1 man. 

Weekly 

wages, 

10 men. 

Machinists (average). 

$13 54 
15 17 
13 80 

$135 40 
151 70 
138 00 

Pattern makers..... 

Joiners. 

Blacksmiths ...._ _.. 

12 89 

128 90 

Blacksmiths’ helpers.. 

8 68 

86 80 

Ship carpenters. 

14 50 

145 00 

Boiler-makers, titters, and riveters. 

13 38 

133 80 

Riggers. 

11 00 

110 00 

Painters. 

13 37 

333 70 

Furnace men... 

8 50 

85 00 

Copper and tinsmiths..... 

14 66 

146 60 

Holders-on (average)...... 

10 13 

101 30 

Teamsters. 

9 00 

90 00 

Founders (molders).„. 

13 88 

138 80 

Finishers (polishers)..... 

14 00 

140 00 

Riveters... 

14 75 

147 50 

Fitters. 

10 94 

109 40 

Drillers (average). 

9 11 

91 10 

Rivet heaters (hoys) .. ... 

4 92 

49 20 

Helpers. 

7 50 

75 00 

Tron ft nisi levs punchers planers and ehippers (aiverao-e) ____ 

10 64 

106 40 

Boiler-makers’ ehippers ... 

10 30 

103 00 




Total weekly wages ten men each class .......... 


2, 546 60 

Less pay ten hniler-ma.kers’ ehippers. not in Clyde yards. . 


103 00 






2, 443 60 


SUMMARY. 


Weekly wages of 10 men each of above classes, yard, John Roach & Son. $2, 44J 60 
W eekly wages of 10 men each of above classes, yard on Clyde. 1,37? 40 


Excess in cost of same labor in United States 


1,066 20 


Percentage of excess on basis of 10 workmen, each class, about 77 per cent. 

These are the rates that were paid during the strike last summer, and paying now. 
There are about 3,000 men employed at the works of John Roach & Son, at Chester 
and New York combined, with an average pay-roll of about $32,000 per week. 


Value and quantity of ship-plates and angle-irons used by John Roach f Son from 1876 to 

1881, inclusive. 

SHIP PLATES. 


i 




G) 

p . 

5 

Vf. 





Pt 2 

P 


Year. 



© o 

ei 

4- 

4-4 






G 





P 





i ^ 






Cents. 

Pounds , 






2,198,139 






6, 803, 299 


8, 766, 913 


5, 691,480 






7, 522,495 






7, 570, 995 




% 

i- 

38, 553, 321 

XOT/ftl 1 1 1 1 11UotJU • • " 




_L- 























































88 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


ANGLE IRON. 


« 

Year. 

Average price 

per pound. 

r 

is* 

’-3 

3876. 

1877 . 

1878 . 

1879 . 

1880 . 

1881. 

Total quantity used. 

Cents. 

2§ 

ox 

-4 

93 

-16 

2* 

H 

0 6. 
-10 

Pounds. 

680, 450 
2,136, 507 
2, 253, 958 
3,640, 905 
2, 394, 767 
2, 277, 020 


11,383,607 


The average difference of the price between ship-plates and angles in this count ry and 
in England during these years have been about f to $ of a cent per pound. At one 
period during a strike the price of plates and angles rose to cents in England tem¬ 
porarily, but it soon fell to the usual figure and is now 2f cents. 


Coastwise tonnage. 37, 609 

Foreign tonnage. 26. 788 

Total tonnage. 64.397 


Total tonnage of the three yards. 

The Harlan and Hollinsworth Company. 

William Cramp & Sons. 

John Roach & Son.. 


Tons. 

64. 496- 
64.397 
146,693 


Grand total. 275,586- 

One hundred thousand 6ve hundred and seventv-six of this is foreign tonnage. 

1 o o 

Mr. Roach made a statement before the committee in New York with regard to the 
amount of iron tonnage built in the United States from 1870 to 1880, and some ques¬ 
tion arose as to its being correct. This paper shows the number of tons built for the 
coast and foreign trade by three yards on the Delaware. 

This is an increase of steam tonnage in the foreign trade since 1870 of over 400 per 
cent. 


ARGUMENT OF 


MR. JOHN ROACH ON THE DECLINE OF AMERICAN SHIP¬ 
PING. 


REASONS ANI) REMEDY. 

Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Committee : 

It is supposed by many that the repeal of our navigation laws, giving us the right 
to buy ships in the cheapest market, would restore our shipping to its proper position 
on the sea, but that in the interest of a few ship-builders those laws are kept in force. 
Now, it is generally known that 1 am a ship-builder, and that I am in favor of build¬ 
ing ships at home. But the reason why I am in favor of this, is because history 
teaches that no nation can ever become a great ship-owning nation that cannot in peace 
and in war build its own ships. For I am here as a ship-owner too, having more 
capital invested in iron ships in the foreign trade than I have in sliip-building.° And I 
want to say here that I am opposed to giving either subsidies or bounties, or free 
material for the construction of ships, to the ship-buihler, for almost all the great 
nations that have tried this policy have failed to succeed. 

What we want is legislation to enable the merchant to run the ship with profit in 
the foreign trade. When he can do this there will be a demand for ships and the ships 
will be built, and not before. The difference in the first cost is the least of the mer¬ 
chant’s difficulties in the way of ship-owning. 

England now has some $680,000,000 invested in ships. The policy that gave confi¬ 
dence to her capitalists to concentrate this vast capital on the ocean to face the com¬ 
petition of the world, the policy she pursued to aid her merchants to run them after 
they were built, maybe of interest to your committee. It will help, and indeed i* 

























AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 




necessary, to show how England came to occupy her present wonderful position on the- 
sea. It was not a policy of a month, a year, or a series of years, hut of almost a 
century. Her statesmen were determined from the first to succeed on the sea, cost 
what it might in diplomacy, legislation, and war, and they succeeded. It is only by 
knowing their continued struggles and what it cost them, that you can form any 
just estimate of wliat we have to contend with to regain our share of the foreign car¬ 
rying trade. 

If we ever do regain it, it will have to be by a great national effort and by con¬ 
tinued reliance on ourselves, and when it is restored to our flag, we must have tlier 
power in peace or war to maintain it in our own country, and that can come only by 
building the ships ourselves. As for getting it back by free material or by free- 
ships, you might as well send a lot of school-girls to stem the tide with hay-rakes. 

As we review the history that is absolutely essential to a right understanding of 
this question, I call your attention specially to the fact that England’s policy was 
such as made it impossible for private enterprise of other nations to meet her. For 
where it was necessary the merchant marine was made a part of the government, 
and a guarantee of dividend was given in case competition could not otherwise be 
driven out. I must ask your indulgence for the length of this historical review. It 
is as compressed as the facts will allow. 

But before proceeding with this, let us look at the world’s tonnage as it was in 1880. 
by official reports: 



Character. 


Number. 

Tonnage. 

° 

Estimated 

value. 

Sailiug vessels .. 
Steam vessels_ 



. 49,524 

. 5,462 

14.317, 430 

5, 524, 797* 

$572, 692, 000- 
552, 479, 700- 

Total. 



. 54,986 

19, 842, 227 

1,125, 171, 700" 


* By tlie best authorities, one ton of steam is estimated to be equal to three tons of sail in carrying 
capacity, so that the steam tonnage actually represents a capacity of 16,674,391 tons. 

The shipping interest of the four principal nations is as follows: 


Nations. 


Total ships... 

England. 

United States 

Germany. 

France . 


Number. 

Tonnage. 

Value. 

54, 986 

19, 842, 227 

$1,125,171, 700- 

21, 610 

9,161,205 

574, 359, 420’ 
143, 944, 380' 

6, 566 

2, 684, 943 

3, 421 

1,168, 341 

61, 953, 660 

3, 247 

931,152 

57, 359. 220 


A comparative table of steam tonnage shows the following division: 


Nation 


Total steamships 

England . 

United States ... 

Gerpiany. 

France. 


Number. 

Tonnage. 

Value. 

5, 462 

5, 524, 797 

$552, 479. 700 

3, 216 

3, 465,187 

346, 518, 700 

516 

609, 111 

60, 911,100* 

220 

253, 667 

25, 366, 700 

275 

335, 219 

33, 521, 90O> 


From this it will be seen that England owns considerably more than one-halt the 
steam tonnage of the world, while more than half of the steamships owned by France 
and Germany were built in England. These facts, and the further fact that more 
than one-half of the world’s freight is carried in England’s ships, will show you what 
vast success she has achieved. 

Let us now look briefly at the aggressions of England on our commerce in our earlier 
years and the legislation that grew out therefrom, aud see how persistently she pur- 
8ued that aggressive policy till she had achieved the end she sought. 


ENGLISH AGGRESSION. 


This history abounds with evidence of the persecution of American shipping by 
British rulers*even after the Revolution, by commercial devices after force of arms had 
failed. Our ships in colonial ports were discriminated against and subjected to malad¬ 
ministration in penalties by colonial governors, as well as to inteference of Parliament 
and direct and prejudicial edict from the throne. Thus Lord Sheffield headed a a io- 
lent opposition to a reciprocal shipping policy between the two nations, and succeeded 
in having the order issued in 1784 that “American vessels should be entirely excluded. 







































90 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


from The British West Indies,” and that American products should be absolutely pro¬ 
hibited “from entering colonial ports, even in British bottoms.” 

This condition of our inequality brought forth a vigorous letter of protest from Mr. 
Adams, then American minister to England. After several ineffectual attempts to se¬ 
cure reciprocal relations in shipping interests, after offering every concession, almost 
to humiliation, at last, despairing of equity or honor, he wrote to the American Secre¬ 
tary of State (under date London, October 21, 1785) as follows: 

“This being the state of things, you may depend upon it the commerce of the United 
States will have no relief at present, nor, in my opinion, ever, until we shall have 
passed navigation acts. If such measure is not adopted we shall be derided, and the 
more we suffer the more will our calamities be laughed at. * * * My earnest ex¬ 

hortations to the State then are, and ought to be, to lose no time in passing such act.” 

But before we reach the passage'of our navigation laws it should be said that from 
the close of the Revolution, when our colonies were merely a loose union of confeder¬ 
ated States, England regarded us as hostile in our shipping interest, and applied her 
famous navigation act. to us with all its force. She would not permit us even to carry 
our products to her in our own ships, except at the discretion of the King. A yearly 
proclamation was issued giving the right to bring our products to England; but we 
could not take a cargo from any foreign port to England, and what rights we did 
3iave were liable to be withdrawn at any time. England refused for many years to 
make a treaty of commerce with us. Our ships on reaching England were taxed two 
shillings per ton duty, and had to pay “light money ” besides to support English light¬ 
houses. We were entirely excluded, as has been seen, from the British West Indies, 
whither more than one-fourth of our shipping had formerly traded. Before our Con¬ 
stitution was adopted our shipping was embarrassed in every way. 

AMERICAN LEGISLATION. 

In 1789 the first American Congress met. It is a significant fact that its third law 
was one imposing a tonnage tax of fifty cents a ton on foreign vessels, which just off¬ 
set the duty per ton on our ships in England. Thus began our retaliative legislation, 
made necessary by England’s injustice to American shipping. 

By this same Congress a navigation act as stringent as that, of England was passed, 
in accordance with Mr. Adams’s advice. It was in accordance also with the sound 
principle laid down by Thomas Jefferson, that “if a nation persists in a system of 
prohibitions, duties, and regulations, it behooves this government to adopt counter 
prohibitions, duties, and regulations.” The navigation act reserved the coasting trade 
to our own people, and restricted importations to ships American built, manned, and 
owned. Thus we met England’s policy of aggression by a like policy at the outset of 
•our national life. 

In 1793 England tried a new measure. She ordered us not to carry to France the 
products of 1 rencli colonies, and in one year seized 600 of our ships for so doing. 
W e embargoed her ships for thirty days, and again sought to obtain a treaty of com¬ 
merce and navigation. One was concluded November 19, 1794; ratified October 28, 
1<9;>, and proclaimed February 29, 1796. That was what we won by meeting En¬ 
gland's policy squarely in 1793; but note that it was thirteen years after Independ¬ 
ence before our trade with England rested on any better basis than yearly orders of 
the King. 

llie object of this treaty was reciprocity with respect to tonnage taxes. But Eng¬ 
land still imposed the “light-money tax on our ships, prohibited the importation 
of our salt fish, salt meats, and other important products into her borders, and still 
refused to let us trade to her colonies. The “light-money” tax was heavy, consider¬ 
ing how small vessels then were, the average ship of good size being only 200 tons. 
In St. George’s Channel the light tax was 5d. per ton; in the English Channel, Is. 
■id. ; the northern lights, 4 ^d. per ton. English ships had to pay the tax only once: 
but American ships three times, or treble what the English ships paid. Our minister 
4o England begged vainly for the repeal of this inequality. 

At last, in March, 1804, the American Congress increased the tonnage duties on 
foreign ships from 50 cents to $1, or enough to offset the English “ light money.” 

1 has again we met her policy with one of self-defense. 

Under these protective measures our ships multiplied greatly—not less than five- 
cold from 1803 to 1806. W T e gained rapidly in the China and East India trade, and 
England became thoroughly aroused with jealousy, her ship-owners urging the <>ov- 
•erament to protect them. ‘ ° ° 


In tlie 
measure. 


TWO OUTRAGEOUS MEASURES, AND HOW WE MET THEM. 

summer of 1805 England suddenly revived an obsolete law as a restrictive 
1 lie English lords of trade contrived that measure; it was that the vessels 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


91 


ot neutral nations should not trade to the colonies of France and Spain, England 
then being- at war with those nations. This cut us off instantly from a great West 
Indian. South American, and East Indian trade, making our ships engaged in it liable 
to seizure and confiscation. This law was an outrage on international rights, and it 
at once drove home to our own ports a vast quantity of American shipping that had 
heretofore been engaged abroad in general trading between foreign countries. 

Then England aggravated this, adding insult to injury, by beginning to stop and 
search American ships for alleged deserters. “Once an English subject, always a 
subject was her claim, and she asserted it even to impressing every Irishman or 
subject ot Great Britain found on an American ship, besides claiming the right to 
confiscate, any ship on which her subjects might be found, in fact or pretense. This 
was a claim as ruinous to American ship-owners as it was outrageous and in violation 
ot every principle ot equity and national right. It was put forth with barefaced 
purpose to check and destroy our rapidly growing carrying trade. Under it above 
1,600 American ships and 6,000 seamen were seized, and* it led finally to the w r ar of 
1812. J 
On April 18, 1806, a non-importation act was passed in Congress by great majori¬ 
ties. to meet this wrong. In June, 1807, tlifi British man-of-war Leopard approached 
the American frigate Chesapeake, on our coast, and proposed to search her for British 
seamen. This was indignantly refused, whereupon the Leopard fired upon and com¬ 
pelled a surrender of the Chesapeake. England disavowed the outrage and promised 
reparation, but never made any. President Jefferson at once issued a proclamation 
closing American ports to British ships of war. No reparation being yet offered, 
Congress, on December 21, 1807, passed the celebrated embargo act, by which Ameri¬ 
can vessels were detained at home, and commercial intercourse with England was 
prohibited. This embargo lasted fourteen months. Thus again we met England’s ag¬ 
gression with retaliative legislation. 


the war of 1812. 

But the miserable warfare upon our shipping continued until it became unendura¬ 
ble. April 8,1812, Congress passed an embargo on all British vessels within our juris¬ 
diction. June 19, following, the President declared tear. He was forced to do it by 
England's undisguised attacks on our shipping. July 1, an extraordinary tonnage 
tax of $2.50 per ton was imposed on all foreign vessels until the war should end. It 
is not needful to go into the details of that war; that was simply a war made by 
England on American shipping. It was through our shipping that we won the day, 
and established forever the rights of American citizens on the high seas ; disposing 
forever, as well, of England’s false claim of perpetual citizenship. Thus we met war 
with war. 


THE VICTORIES OF PEACE. 


July J, 1815, a reciprocity treaty was concluded with England that at last placed 
ships and imports on an equal footing—that is, the ships of each were to be taxed no 
higher than those of the most favored nation, and equality in tounage, taxes, &c., 
between England and America was secured; but the West Indies were still left out 
of the treaty, which was to last four years. October 20, 1818, it was continued for 
ten years, and August 6, 1827, it was continued indefinitely. 

But the British navigation act still remained in force, and at the close of the war 
we re-enacted our old navigation act, forbidding any vessel to trade to this country 
except from its own ports, in all cases where a similar regulation was enforced against 
us. This was simply to secure fair play, compelling all the European nations to make 
fair and friendly treaties with us, and to put our ships on equal footing with their 
own. Thus did our earlier statesmen in every case promptly meet aggression with 
retaliation, and make it known that the American ship must be accorded freedom 
and equal rights on the sea. 

THE WEST IXDIA AND CANADIAN TRADE. 

After the peace of 1815 our commerce did not reap all the advantages expected, by 
reason of England’s policy regarding the West India and Canadian trade. We wanted 
to revive the old profitable trade in our grain and provisions, but our ships were ob¬ 
structed by duties and regulations, which our representatives in London, Mr. Adams, 
Richard Rush, and others, tried vainly for years to have abolished. The British were 
resolved not to let us into that trade, and legislated by discriminating duties to shut 
us out and give employment to tlieir own ships. 

Thus produce imported to England from Halifax, St. John’s, or the West Indies 
could come in cheaper in British vessels and from British ports than in vessels hail- 


92 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


ing from American ports direct. Hence English vessels would load in America, sail 
to Halifax, unload and reload the cargo, sometimes actually but often nominally, and 
then go to England with it, bringing it in at a smaller duty. British vessels also had 
the advantage of us in the trade to and from the West Indies. Our persistent at¬ 
tempts at negotiation were in vain. We gave England rights which she would not 
give us. 


the thick of a circuitous trade. 

British ships, too, took advantage of a circuitous trade. This was reported by a 
committee to Congress, as follows: 

“Many vessels now go from the ports of Great Britain carrying British manufact¬ 
ures to the United States; they load there with lumber and provisions for the Brit¬ 
ish West Indies, and then return to the United States with the produce of the Island 
for Great Britain, and take in additional freight from the United States coast.” 

This circuitous trading of ships was regarded as robbing American ships of a legiti¬ 
mate trade, and also in great measure of their coasting trade. Further, it was 
complained that British ships could under the treaty carry a full cargo from a Brit¬ 
ish port, discharge the whole or part, and then reload and proceed to any port 
of the United States, take up another cargo, and start for any other port; while an 
American ship could only import a cargo direct from the United States to a British 
port, and could not reload in England and sail to any foreign port. This inequality 
was clear and undeniable, and led to protracted discussions. 

BREACH OF FAITH CONFESSED. 

In this we have the evidence that England, even under pretended “reciprocity,” 
endeavored to take advantage of us in every way. The fact was openly acknowl¬ 
edged by Mr. Lindsay, the leading English shipping historian. He says: 

“ Our statesmen saw intuitively that the United States were destined to become 
the lead of a powerful and a highly commercial nation. * * * This reciprocity, as 

it was called, worked disadva ntageously for British ships and we adhered to our restrict¬ 
ive law, which provides that produce of Asia, Africa, and America should not be im¬ 
ported in foreign ships.” 

Here was the first breach of faith in reciprocity. “The Americans,” he adds, ‘-re¬ 
taliated for this restriction by applying it to all goods the produce of Europe.” 
Hence arose a warfare of restriction. It was now beginning to be recognized by 
England that the American statesmen did not propose to submit to foreign injus¬ 
tice. 


RETALIATORY LEGISLATION WINS AGAIN. 

May 15, 1820, Congress passed an act providing that from September 30th that year, . 
the ports of the United States were to be closed against British ships coming from 
the maritime provinces in Canada, the British West Indies, and the British colonies 
in South America. Also that British ships sailing from the United States be required 
to give good bonds t hat their cargoes should be landed in ports other than those named 
above. Also that no goods be imported from these places save such as were the local 
growth or manufacture of the place, under penalty of confiscation. This was done 
to compel England to open the West Indian and colonial trade to us. At any rate, it 
would stop her trade from those colonies to us when we could not go there. 

This stroke of retaliation brought England to terms. Parliament ^opened the West 
Indies and other colonies to our trade August 24, 1822, and President Monroe opened 
our ports to English vessels from those colonies. Once more admitted to the West 
Indian trade, our progress was so rapid that again British ship-owners were alarmed, 
and all sorts of duties and regulations were enacted with purpose to embarrass us. 
The result was that in 1827 so many were the obstructing duties and regulations that 
the West Indian trade was of little value to us, and indeed practically closed against 
us. March 17th of this year President Adams again prohibited all trade with the 
British colonies in America and the West Indies. 

In 1830 England again came to terms perforce, and finally conceded full reciprocity 
in the West Indian and colonial trades, which were thenceforward unrestricted. 
Thus still had our statesmen met every stroke in England’s oppressive policy, and 
everv time with success. 

V 

Thus it was a steady struggle during the forty-seven years from 1783 to 1830 to ob¬ 
tain our rights on the sea, and we got them in every case onhj after the loss of vast 
sums of money and of life, and only after vigorous retaliation on our part. The 
whole history of our intercourse with England is one of success in trade and naviga¬ 
tion only through retaliation. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


93 


OUR PROGRESS UNDER DIFFICULTIES. 

L< j ! us look lor ;i moment at tlie figures of shipping progress while our statesmen 
were thus meeting England in every turn of her policy, whether war or restriction. 
I lie result of our protective and retaliative legislation wals wonderful from the very 
start. From 1789 to 1812 our tonnage increased from 280,000 to 1,100.000, or 400 per 
cent., while England’s increased only from 1,500,000 to 2,000,000, or 25 per cent. And 
there is no instance where any nation has ever made such progress as we did in ship¬ 
ping bet ween 1815 and 1840 under our protective laws against England’s attacks. 
I he following statistics of tonnage entering the ports of the United States in the years 
named front 1789 to 1844 will show the fluctuations caused by legislation, and our ad¬ 
vance whenever the circumstances were equitable and favorable : 


Years. 


1789 

1795 

1800 

180(i 

1812 

1815 

1820 

1827 

1835 

1840 

1844 


American. 


127, 329 
580, 277 
682, 871 
1,044, 008 
669, 999 
700, 500 
801, 252 
918, 361 
1, 352, 653 
1, 576, 946 
1, 977, 438 


British. 


94,410 1 
27, 097 
71,689 
69,350 
1,196 
145,368 
47, 365 
101,470 
529, 922 
582,424 j 
766,747 


Total for¬ 
eign. 

106, 6*4 
56, 832 
121, 403 
91, 084 
47, 098 
217, 413 
78, 859 
137, 589 
641,310 
712, 363 
916, 992 


i 


A NOTE OF WARNING. 


So excellent was our position in 1827 that the London Times thus expressed Eng¬ 
land’s alarm. From an editorial in May, 1827, we quote : 

“ It is not our habit to sound the tocsin on light occasions, but we conceive it to 
be impossible to view the existing state of things in this country without more than 
apprehension and alarm. Twelve years of peace, and what is the situation of Great 
Britain ? The shipping interest, the cradle of our navy, is half ruined. Our com¬ 
mercial monopoly exists no longer; and thousands of our manufacturers are starving 
or seeking redemption in distant lands. We have closed the Western Indies against 
America from feelings of commercial rivalry. Its active seamen have already en¬ 
grossed an important branch of our carrying trade to the East Indies. Her starred 
flag is now conspicuous on every sea, and will soon defy our thunder.” 

What a humiliating confession was this from a nation that had labored so hard in 
war and diplomacy to drive us from the sea ! But this condition went on from bad 
to worse, until in 1833 a commission was appointed to investigate the whole matter 
and report what could be done to benefit English shipping. And after this commis¬ 
sion had reported that it was of no use for England to try to compete in building the 
wooden ship, inasmuch as the Americans had the timber right at hand and could build 
the fastest and best ships, the great question was how to find something superior to 
the wooden ship that England could build better than any other nation. For what¬ 
ever might be done in the way of the casual purchase of American-built clipper ships, 
the shrewd men of England who had the shipping interest in charge knew well that 
no nation could hope to maintain a chief place on the sea that did not build its own 
ships. The drain of money to pay and support foreign labor, and to buy and keep in 
repair a vast fleet, would exhaust any nation’s treasury and destroy its home market. 

THE POLICY OF WISDOM AND STATESMANSHIP. 

The board of admiralty was directed carefully to investigate the condition of the 
shipping interest. Finding that the fast American clipper-ships were running away 
from the English vessels, they took up the question of steam. The experiment of 
steam was tried for many years, with but comparatively little success. The states¬ 
men of England satisfied themselves how impossible it was to he first on the sea with¬ 
out building their own ships, and how impossible it was to build ships without having 
the material at home. Then came the suggestion of iron. The whole ship-building 
and engineering talent of Great Britain began to discuss the question of iron, of which 
England had abundance, as material for ships. Experiments were made. It was 
found that the cost of building iron ships would he far greater than that of buying 
wooden ones from us. The same difficulty confronted the English ship-builder that 
later met the American ship-builder when the change had to be made from wood to 




















94 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


iron, from sail to steam. The plant for the iron ship was ten times the cost—for the 
wooden ship required only the ground to build on, the tools belonged to the work¬ 
man himself, whije the iron ship required the rolling-mills, the engine-works, and all 
the elaborate machinery of the iron ship-yard. But because of this difficulty was the 
proposition made that the experiment of iron ship-building be given up, and the 
clipper-ships be bought of America f On the contrary, the English statesmen im¬ 
mediately found a plan to overcome this difficulty, by beginning to construct a navy in 
the private iron slnp-yards. This demand of the government for the ships created a 
capital for the plant; and from that time down the English Government has pursued 
that policy of constructing her navy in the private yards; thus establishing a confi- 
dence in her private ship-builders that drew the capital and custom of other nations 
to them. From that time, as a consequence, more than half the navies of the world 
have been built in England’s ship-yards, and nearly all the governments of the world 
are dependent on England for their naval ships. 

While England had cheap capital, cheap labor, and her iron ship-building devel¬ 
oped, she yet directly aided not only the building, but the running of the ship, and 
to this it was that she owed her hold on every sea. Large annual appropriations 
were made, and in return the board of admiralty made it a condition: 1. That the 
ships must be approved by the board as being easily convertible into war ships. 2. 
That they be put into lines where it was most desirable to open new markets for 
Great Britain’s manufactures; and 3. That they carry the mails to the different 
countries where trade was most desirable, and break down opposition to her ships 
running in those directions. This policy the government was determined to sustain 
at any cost, having learned by experience that it was cheaper than war. Under cer¬ 
tain contracts ships were actually paid not to cover any specific ports, but to roam 
between certain latitudes, picking up trade wherever they could find it. They were 
a sort of government-supported commercial rover. - 

Between 1840 and 1860 England paid out under her board of admiralty $120,000,000 
to steamships. In 1860 she had 150 steamships in the foreign trade. Each ton of 
steam is equal in capacity to three tons of sail, so that though her steam tonnage 
showed only the same as sail, it had a capacity three times what appeared; while in 
1860 we had only three side-wheel wooden steamers in the foreign trade; so that in 
the ship of the future England had in those years gained on us as 58 to 1. We had 
met England in every policy but that whereby she developed her iron ship-building. 

MAIL CONTRACTS AS A HELP. 

As I have shown, under the board of admiralty the new policy of building up a 
steam marine was begun, and when Samuel Cunard offered, in 1840, to build aline of 
mail steamships for the North Atlantic, his offer was at once accepted. In 1840, he 
had four 1,200-ton wooden side-wheel steamers, 228 feet long over all, 34 feet beam, 
28-feet deep paddle wheels, and beam engines. The names of the four ships were 
Columbia, Britannia, Acadia, and Caledonia. Their speed was nine knots in favora¬ 
ble circumstances. It would not cost to build them more than $200,000 each, making a 
total cost ot $800,000 on these vessels; yet Mr. Cunard got his contract of $413,000, 
($16,000 per round trip) the first year, and this was increased to $550,000 the next 
year, or seventy per cent, per annum on the whole cost of the ships. 

This was a subsidy, pure and simple, given to Mr. Cunard to enable him to estab¬ 
lish and maintain his line, and increased that he might run his line not only without 
loss but at a profit. Without it, does any one believe the line would have ever been 
started? This liberal subsidy was increased to $705,666 in 1846, when two more ships 
weie put on, and still remaining at seventy per cent, on the whole capital invested 
This gave the company a liberal margin to use as a “ fighting fund ” to cut rates 
against the American clippers; even this was much cheaper than England’s war ex¬ 
periment of 1812. 

The amount annually paid under this board of admirality was equal to thirty per 
cent on the capital invested. The citizen of no other nation could afford to'meet 
the ship-owner of Great Britain in competition, for it was not the citizen of Great 
Britain he had to compete with, but the English treasury at the back of the merchant 
marine. 


A ME R r CA’S EX PE RIM ENT, 

When these lines were started the pride of the American people was aroused We 
had met England m all her attempts to drive us from the ocean, in embargo, in re¬ 
strictions, m retaliatory measures, and in war, and the disposition was now to meet 
her in this nev policy of diplomacy. When it was seen that England began to take 
away from us the mails, passengers, and costly freight, a patriotic citizen, Mr. Col¬ 
lins, the owner ot one ot our finest old packet lines to Liverpool, sold his ships and 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


95 


invested liis fortune in the construction of what was known as the Collins line. He 
had the promise that our government would sustain him against the English Govern¬ 
ment and the Cunard line. He built his ships superior in tonnage, speed, and comfort 
to the English ships, made quicker time than the Cunard vessels, and again for a brief 
period the American flag held the first place on the sea. I have already told how the 
Cunard contract was renewed and enlarged. Our government, without considering 
the conditions or its promises, tired of the experiment before it was fairly made, re¬ 
fused to continue the Collins line, and the American flag was hauled down. Mr. Col¬ 
lins was ruined, liis ships were sold, and a signal warning was thus given to the cap¬ 
italists of the United States that our government had surrendered to Great Britain's, 
new policy. 

But perhaps the most astounding thing of all was that our own government should 
turn around and help subsidize the same English ships, paying the Cunard line for 
carrying the United States mails. Thus we witnessed the pleasant spectacle of the 
English Government and our own uniting to subsidize an English line, and keep us 
from holding our true position on the ocean. We paid to English lines from 1850 to 
1865, $13,800,000. 


SOME VIEWS WORTH HEEDING. 


When this great wrong—that only a few years later was to cost our country many 
millions of money and hundreds of thousands of invaluable lives—was inflicted upon 
the American merchant marine, in the debates in Congress the following words show 
the dread our statesmen had of England’s designs upon our position on the sea. 

WHAT MR. POLK SAID. 

Mr. Polk, in debate in Congress upon sustaining the Collins line, said : 

“ It is strange, sir, that men who are presumed to embody the wisdom of the land 
should have to be reminded that they are pandering to British power —that they are 
forgetting American interest, and losing sight of that greatness and grandeur which 
attaches to this American Government. I stand upon the floor of the American Con¬ 
gress and find men who are willing to measure our greatness by the circumference of 
a dollar—a dollar, sir—measure American prosperity, American greatness by a round 
dollar, and thus pander to British interest, to bow the pliant knee and say to the 
power that assailed us at Lexington, that flashed the first guns from Bunker Hill, 
that fought us upon sea and land in 1812; that has been jealous of our prosperity and 
greatness ever since—‘Good mother, won’t you carry our mails for us?’ Why, sir, 
I scorn, I despise this anti-American feeling and sentiment. The men who stand bat¬ 
tling upon these principles are behind the age. They are behind the progress of their 
country, they know nothing of its power or its influence, and are contributing to a 
combination of foreign policy designed to overslaugh us.” 

Never were there truer words, or fuller of foresight; and just such men as then 
fought for British interests find their allies and representatives to-day in our country, 
crying out for free trade and free ships. 

WIIAT SENATOR BAYARD SAID. 

Mr. Bayard, the father of the present Senator, said in 1852, while advocating jus¬ 
tice to the Collins line : 

“ I am willing to trust American skill and industry in competition with any peo¬ 
ple on the globe, when they stand nation to nation, without government interference. 
But if the treasury of a foreign nation is poured into the lap of individuals for the 
purpose of destroying the interests of my country, or for building up a commercial 
marine at the expense of the commerce and prosperity of the United States, I, for 
one, will count no cost in countervailing such governmental action on the part of 
Great Britain or any foreign power. 

“It has been objected that these grants create a monopoly. * * * If the argu¬ 

ment be true, I ask you if it does not apply to the transportation of your mails by 
land. * * * Then the whole government action is a series of monopolies as re¬ 

gards the ‘post-office service.’” 

He then argued that it was not monopoly, but American competition against British 
monopoly. 

“Will you adopt a policy which will place the entire transportation of your mails 
under their (British) control; which will put into their hands the transportation of 
passengers; which will lay a tax on American citizens for the advancement of British 
commerce, their freights, &c. ? Such may be the judgment of the honorable Senator, 
but it is not mine, and I trust it will not be that of the American Senate. 

“The mail service in this and in all countries on land is a government duty, and 


1)6 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


•with all great maritime nations which have the power to control that service on the 
ocean it ns as much a government duty, where their extensive commerce is concerned, 
as is on land the proper transportation of correspondence. The mail service with for- 
oi«oi countries, on any principle that I can appreciate, is as much a governmental 
duty, and demands as much the expenditure and the attention of the government, as 
transportation of correspondence in the interior of the country. 

Just this thing of placing our mails under British and foreign control has come to 
pass, and these views were as prophetic as they are sound. They commend them¬ 
selves to all citizens, in and out of Congress, who love their own country first and 
beat. This should never be a party question ; both should endeavor to inaugurate a 
policy that Avould build up this merchant marine from our own forest and mine, inde¬ 
pendent of any foreign nation. And when the great mass of our people understand 
the subject it will be done. 


WHAT SENATOR CASS SAID. 

Lewis Cass said in the Senate, on the same subject: 

•• Well, sir, it is a question of protection—of high and important and holy protec¬ 
tion—in the best sense of the term; the protection of our country, of our expatriated 
seamen, of our commerce, of our interests, of our honor, of our soil, of all that gives 
dignity and character to nations; protection against defeat, disgrace, and dishonor 
oi:Tthe sea. This kind of protection to our commerce is as effectual as the protection 
afforded by expensive naval armaments.” 

WHAT WASHINGTON SAID. 

This was in the same line with the wise words of President Washington in his sec¬ 
ond annual message : “I recommend to your serious reflection how far and in what 
mode it may be expedient to guard against embarrassments from these contingencies 
7danger to our goods carried in foreign ships by war], by such encouragement to our 
own navigation as will render our commerce and agriculture less dependent on foreign 
bottoms which may fail ns in the very moment most interesting to both of these great 
objects.” 


WHAT MADISON AND JEFFERSON SAID. 

And to quote brief and applicable words from two other of our earliest and most 
eminent statesmen, who were not ship-owners and whose patriotism will not be ques¬ 
tioned. Madison said: “If America should have vessels at all, she should have enough 
for all the purposes intended ; to do her own carrying, to form a school for seamen, 
laying the foundation of a navy, and to be able to support herself against the inter¬ 
ference of foreigners.” 

While Jefferson, in his famous report on commerce, said, with singular prophetic 
vision : 

u Our navigation involves still higher considerations. As a branch of industry it 
is valuable; but as a resource of defense essential. The position and circumstances 
of the United States leave them nothing to fear from their land-board, and nothing 
to desire beyond their present rights. But on the seaboard they are open to injury, 
and they have there, too, a commerce which must be protected. This can only be 
done by possessing a resjiectable body of citizen seamen, and of artisans and estab¬ 
lishments in readiness for sliip-buildiug. If particular nations grasp at undue shares 
(of commerce or carrying), and more especially if they seize on the means of the 
United States to convert them into aliment for their own strength and withdraw them 
entirely from the support of those to whom they belong, defensive and protecting 
measures become necessary on the part of the nation whose marine resources are thus 
invaded, or it will be disarmed of its defense, its productions will be at the mercy of 
the nation which has possessed itself exclusively of the means of carrying them, and 
its politics may be influenced by those who command its commerce. The carriage of 
our own commodities, if once established in another channel, cannot be resumed in 
the moment we desire. If we lose the seamen and artisans whom it now occupies, we 
lose the present means of marine defense, and time will be requisite to raise up others, 
when disgrace or losses shall bring home to our feelings the evils of having abandoned 
them.” Is notour present condition here truthfully described by Jefferson ? 

ENGLAND’S WARNING TO FOREIGN CAPITALISTS. 

I commend these views of our earlier statesmen to your consideration. They are 
applicable to-day with even more force than originally, in view of our growth in 
commerce, our decline in carrying, and the demands of our future. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


97 • 

It requires millions of capital to start large steamship lines on the ocean. Capital¬ 
ists of all nations, before investing in the business, are looking to the competition, 
they are likely to meet. In 1867 England notified the capitalists of the world of the 
-competition they might expect in any effort for the ocean carrying trade. The ex¬ 
periment was tried by French capital backed by the French Government, but failed 
through England’s policy. 

The Oriental Steamship Company (English) owned 37 ships and had a subsidy 
amounting to $2,250,000 a year, or 12 per cent, on their whole capital, but this was not 
sufficient to meet the French opposition. The company decided to withdraw their 
fleet and surrender the trade to France. The English Government at once ordered a 
commission to investigate the affairs of the company. This commission reported that 
to make the company’s business pay a guarantee must be given to pay them 8 per 
cent, during the French opposition. The great line was saved and the company’s 
ships kept in commission. This was a notice to the capitalists of the world that the 
English treasury was at the back of her ocean carrying, 

And to show you more fully how this question was looked at iu England, I will 
quote from the official documents submitted to Parliament. These documents both 
dispose effectually of the claim sometimes made here that England never paid sub¬ 
sidies, and prove how firmly the English Government favored its successful policy of 
aiding to establish and maintain steamship lines, under the board of admiralty and 
postal contracts alike. As iu the case of the Oriental line not even a pretense of pay 
for mail service was kept up, but a dividend of 8 percent,, was assured the company, 
that its Ships might be run for the purposes of fostering English trade. 

THE MERCHANT MARINE A PART OF THE GOVERNMENT. 

Let us take the official documents in support of this. The one, for example, with 
the Peninsular and Oriental Company—made with them in 1853—for an annual subsidy 
of $2,500,000 was to expire January 1, 1867. February 27, 1866, a new contract was 
made. Whether the contract was made for any other purpose than that of simply 
carrying the mails may be judged from the fact that under the contract the company 
agreed to submit its plans to the government commissioners, and to construct the 
hatchways and other parts of its ships as might be necessary to the carrying and 
firing of a heavy armament. That made the vessels immediately available for naval 
purposes and for defense, and they were at the government’s disposal in case of need, 
and were used in the Crimean war iu a way that opened the eyes of the French to 
the great importance of the merchant marine manned and equipped and at the govern¬ 
ment’s disposal. This merchant marine, made a part of the government as it actually 
was by the terms of contract, added a wonderful strength to its naval force in case 
of extremity. 

With the same company a new contract was made in 1870. In “Articles of agree¬ 
ment made this 6t,h day of August, 1870, between the Right Hon. Spencer Compton 
Cavendish, commonly called the Marquis of Hartington, Her Majesty’s postmaster- 
general, and the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company,” I find that 
for carrying the mails at a speed not exceeding ten knots an hour, “the postmaster- 
general doth hereby covenant that there shall be paid to the company (out of such 
aids or supplies as may from time to time be provided and appropriated by Parlia¬ 
ment for that purpose) the sum of £450,000 ($2,250,000) per annum.” And in section 
46 the contract of 1867 is declared annulled, “all claims of the company in respect 
to the subsidy therein mentioned having been fully satisfied by the payment of a 
subsidy after the rate of £500,000 ($2,500,000) per annum.” 

A DIVIDEND GUARANTEED. 

In an official report, dated July 20, 1870, I find this significant passage: 

“By the terms of the contract concluded with the Peninsular and Oriental Steam 
Navigation Company on the 19th of November, 1867. the subsidy to be paid the com¬ 
pany is set down at £400,000 ($2,000,000) a year, with a stipulation, on the one hand, 
that whenever the annual income of the company from all sources does not admit of 
the payment of a dividend of 8 per cent, on the capital employed the subsidy shall be 
increased bv so much—subject to a limit of £100,000 ($500,000)—as is required to 
make up such a dividend; and, on the other, that whenever the income is sufficient 
to allow a dividend exceeding 8 percent, to be declared the company shall pay to the 
postmaster-general one-fourtli of the excess.” 

NOT ONLY SUBSIDY, BUT DIVIDEND. 

Here is not only a subsidy, but a government guarantee of an 8 per cent, dividend 

067-7 



•98 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


to the company’s stockholders. The company estimated that “ the receipts from the 
passengers aod cargo must, for a long time to come, be greatly below the expendi¬ 
ture absolutely necessary for the maintenance of the service” against the yet more 
highly subsidized French line; and the government promptly raised the annual subsidy 
back to £450,000 ($2,250,000). How could the American Pacific Mail Line compete or 
increase its fleet against this line, which was guaranteed 8 per cent, by the English. 
Government, while our government compelled the Pacific Mail to carry the mail 
against its will for the postage, under the following statute : 

“ United States Revised Statutes, Section 3976.—The master of any vessel of the 
United States, bound from any port, therein to any foreign port, or from any foreign 
port to any port in the United States, shall, before clearance, receive on board and 
securely convey all such mails as the Post-Office Department or any diplomatic or con¬ 
sular agent abroad shall offer; and he shall promptly deliver the same, at the port of 
destination, to the proper officer, for which lie shall receive two cents for every letter 
so delivered; and upon the entry of every such vessel returning from any foreign 
port, the master thereof shall make oath that he has promptly delivered all the mail 
placed on board said vessel before clearance from the United States; and if he fail tD 
make such oath the vessel shall not be entitled to the privileges of a vessel of the 
United States.” 

The following statistics, taken from official sources, will show how different was 
the treatment accorded to its steamship lines by England and the United States. 

HOW ENGLAND ASSISTED HER LINES. 

These figures show the condition of our English steamship lines in 1870 and 188 0 
and the government aid given them under the board of admiralty : 


Lines. 

Subsidy in 
187(1. 

Number 
ships, 1870. 

Number 

tons. 

Capital in 
1870. 

Peninsular and Oriental. 

Pacific Steam Navigation. 

Royal Mail. 

$3, 500, 000 
150, 000 

1, 300, 000 
475, 000 

75 

23 

25 

49 

145, 000 
50, 000 
55, 000 
90, 500 

$10, 000, 000 
9, 000, 000 
4, 500, OOfi 
8, 000, 00d 

Cunard. . 



Lines. 

Number 
ships, 1880. 

Number 
tons, 1880. 

—r 

Dividends 
to share¬ 
holders in 
1880. 

Capital in 
1880. 

Peninsular and Oriental.. 

80 

160, 000 

$725, 000 

$14, 500, \K)0 

Pacific Steam Navigation.. 

25 

60, 000 

590, 000 

9,’ 000,’ 000 

Royal Mail. 

28 

58. 000 

225, 000 

4, 500, 000 

Cunard. 

50 

95, 000 

41o, 000 

8, 000, 000 


The Peninsular and Oriental received in 1880 a subsidy of $2,415,000, and paid a 
dividend of $725,000, which shows a national suppoit of 300 per cent ; in other words 
were it not for the subsidy the company would show a loss of $1,690,000. 

The Royal Mail receives a subsidy of $500,000, and declares a dividend of $225,000 
showing a national support of 200 per cent., without which instead of having a divi¬ 
dend it would have suffered a loss of $275,000. 

By this policy England brought into existence and kept on the seas some 183 steam¬ 
ships, of a tonnage of 373,000 tons, and these ships were maintained where competition 
was met, and were enabled to outrival competitors because of the liberal aid extended 
at home. If the government had not sustained these would they not have gone the 
same way as the Collins line and the late Brazilian line ? What effect would that 
have had on capital ? 

Now contrast with this the treatment by our government of the Pacific Mail Steam¬ 
ship Company, which run in competition with these highly subsidized lines. These 
figures are official: 


PACIFIC MAIL STEAMSHIP COMPANY. 
Number of steamers in service, year ending July 30, 1882 .. 


Gross tonnage.... . 

Mil « 8 run ...I...;"”'..'"'."" 343,’ 401 





































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 99 

Mail pay from United States Government. $21, 767 

Cost of handling mails. 3,555 

Actual pay received. 18, 212 


Again, take the New York, Havana, and Mexican Mail Steamship Line. The fig¬ 
ures are as follows: 


ALEXANDRE, NEW YORK, AND HAVANA LINE. 


Six steamships, tonnage of. 13,240 

Number of miles run in 1881. . 239, 620 

Government pay for carrying mails. .. $3, 774 

Cost of delivery and receipt of mails by tugs to and from steamers. 1, 005 

Actual receipts for mails. 2,769 


This was about H cents a mile. 


THE WARD LINE. 

This line, running between New York and Havana, carries the United States mails 
135,200 miles a year, at about ^ cent a mile. All these lines were compelled to carri/ the 
mails at these rates under the United States statute quoted above. 

THE ROYAL MAIL CONTRACT. 

The case of the English Government’s contract with the Royal Mail Steam-Packet 
Company to Brazil, dated June 26, 1868, is still more striking. That contract guar¬ 
anteed subsidies sufficient to yield 8 per cent, dividend on a capital of £900,000 
($4,500,000). An extension of the period of the contract was asked for, in conse¬ 
quence of serious loss to the company by hurricane, in order to enable it to get on 
its legs again. In view of the French competition, the government readily granted 
it. The fact was frankly admitted by the company’s secretary in 1867, that “during 
the American war and before the competition of the highly subsidized French com¬ 
pany, this company earned sufficient to yield a satisfactory dividend to its share¬ 
holders, but the case has been very different during the last two years.” 

AN IMPORTANT PARLIAMENTARY REPORT. 

An investigation was made by Mr. Scudamore, recognized as the most competent 
man in England in such matters, and he reported, among other things, as follows: 

First. That the circumstances and position of the Royal Mail resemble in many 
striking particulars those of the Peninsular and Oriental Company, and that both 
are conducted upon sound and well-recognized principles. 

Second. That with both companies a subsidy is absolutely necessary to the main¬ 
tenance of the service required from them, and that in the case of both companies 
their ordinary revenue has in no case sufficed to meet, and is now very much below, 
the expenses of the services they have to perform. 

Third. That the Royal Mail Company has held contracts for the conveyance of the 
mails for periods of 27 and 18 years, or a subsidized existence equivalent to 45 years. 
That it could have borne an abatement of £60,000 ($300,000) from its postal subsi¬ 
dies in 1862 and yet have paid a dividend of more than 8 per cent. That in 1864 they 
did suffer an abatement of $300,000, but still paid over 8 per cent., with a further 
dividend of 5 per cent, from their insurance fund. Note how long it took this infant 
company to get its growth and stand alone, though having all the advantages of 
cheap capital, cheap labor, and taxation. 

Fourth. That this prosperity continued until 1866, when it came to an abrupt close; 
that in 1867 the company only just made both ends meet, and that the saving of 
$300,000 per annum to the English Government from 1864 to 1867 could not have been 
effected, and the rapidity, frequency, and efficiency of the communication been at 
the same time maintained if the American war had not thrown into the hands of the 
company a new and very lucrative trade. Thus subsidy and our war did the work of 
driving us from the sea. 

Fifth. That the first question is whether it is considered necessary that the com¬ 
munication between England and the Spanish Main, Central and South America, the 
Brazils, and the river Platte should he as frequent, as rapid, and as secure as hereto¬ 
fore. [As an argument on this point he shows that England’s trade with these 
countries had grown from £39,850,911 in 1862 to £52,495,496 in 1867. And he adds. 












100 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


“ I assume that in whatever way it is thought right to maintain communication with 
those countries the service will he direct, and not, as it was at one time proposed to 
be, by way of New York. I am led to assume the abandonment of the proposition 
for a service via New York, by a perusal of the memorials which the department re¬ 
ceived in 1862 and 1863 against the adoption of that route from the representatives 
of the entire mercantile community of the kingdom. The memorialists all took the 
same ground, that the transmission of the mails via a foreign port, when they could 
be sent direct, was objectionable in principle.”] 

Sixth. That the withdrawal of the subsidy from the Royal Mail Company, if it did 
not altogether break up the company, must entirely alter the character of their opera¬ 
tions and lead almost immediately to a deterioration of the quality of their fleet; 
that there can be no doubt that during the American war the Royal Mail Company 
derived a special advantage from their position as contractors with the British Gov¬ 
ernment, and it is a sound proposition that the subsidy for such services as theirs 
should be such as, taken together with the returns from ordinary traffic, will yield a 
moderate dividend. 

This report was accepted, and the contract extended as asked. And I would like 
to have those who are content to have our mails go to Brazil via England ponder on 
the meaning of these remonstrances of the whole mercantile community of England 
when it was proposed to send a mail line via this country. 

FREE TRADE GONE MAD, 

Thus, though England adopted free trade where it served her purpose, yet to her 
steamship lines she gave the most radical protection. Aud as Mr. Sherman Crawford 
said in his great speech, when the question was before Parliament of renewing the 
mail contract with the Peninsular and Oriental Company, “ to refuse to renew the 
subsidy to English lines, and to let them compete with the highly-subsidized French 
lines, would be free trade gone mad.” 

Mr. Crawford further said, in opening the debate in Parliament, that “wherever 
postal communication has been extended, there commerce has invariably been at¬ 
tracted; in fact the conveyance of the mails has proved a most efficient agency for 
increasiDg our trade in all parts of the world.” This is a point worth noting, and is 
one that I have always maintained. 

“I for one hold that there are considerations to be taken into account in this mat¬ 
ter, which are wholly apart from the question of the profit and loss arising upon the 
accounts of the post-office. This difference is not considerable; but whatever it is, 
that difference represents the whole cost to this country of the means by which not 
only the commercial but the social and political connection between this country aud 
the world is kept up.” 

THE VALUE OF POSTAL COMMUNICATION. 

Sir Charles Wood, who is an authority second to none, wrote to the secretary of the 
post-office in October, 1867 : 

“It has been the perception of the bearing of increased postal communication on 
the wealth and progress of the country, that has induced statesmen of late years to 
consent to fiscal sacrifices for the purpose of obtaining it. There can be no doubt 
that increased postal communication implies increasing relations, increased commerce, 
increased investment of English capital, and from all these sources the wealth and 
^prosperity of England are greatly increased.” 

I commend those views to the theorists who make light of the value of postal com¬ 
munication as a necessity to the building up of commerce. Do they not show that 
England did pay subsidies for some further purpose than simply the carrying of the 
mails ? But speaking of the proposal to afford to foreigu companies tiie power of 
competing, Mr. Crawford said: 

“Now, what I desire to do on this occasion is to protest in the name of the interest 
of the country and of commerce, and in justice to our own companies, against the 
ships of the Messageries Impffi'iales, or of any other foreign company, being employed 
in the conveyance of our mails. [Loud cheers from all parts of the house. ] You way 
carry the principle of economy too far. [Hear! Hear!] Such a course of proceeding would 
he free trade gone mad” [Renewed cheers.] 

THE VALUE OF A MERCHANT MARINE IN WAR. 

“ I am convinced that the subject has not been sufficiently considered. For what 
•would be the position of this country iu the event of a war or any interruption of ex¬ 
isting relations taking place? Supposing the Messageries Imp6riales or any other 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


101 


foieign company be awarded the contracts for our mail service, what would be the 
position ot our commerce in the event of our being unfortunately engaged in hostili¬ 
ties with the country with whose people the contract has been entered into, or even 
in the event of that country being at war with some other?” [Hear! Hear!] 

A PERTINENT QUESTION. 

I want to call special attention to the above sound suggestions, because it has been 
asserted here—even by a man of Professor Sumner’s rank—that it makes no difference 
at all whether we carry our own mails or products or have foreigners carry them, so 
that they are carried most cheaply. That certainly was not England’s view or policy. 
And I would like to ask any sensible man this question: If England had lost her 
carrying and merchant marine under such circumstances as we did, and if it had been 
declared that England would be better olf to let France carry her mails and to buy 
what tew ships she could get from France instead of securing the meausto build them 
at home; it, moreover, when a proposal was made to establish steamship lines to 
carry the mails to new ports which needed to be opened up to commerce and give to 
English producers new markets, a great outcry was made about “subsidy;” if, in 
short, any Englishman had talked so unpatriotically and absurdly and misrepresented 
things so badly as certain American theorists have done, would not Mr. Crawford, 
yes, and even Mr. Cobden himself, have said that they were “ free-traders gone mad ”? 

THE VIGILANCE OF ENGLAND. 

Now, on another point of national importance, read what Mr. Crawford says in 
Parliament while the subject was under discussion : 

“ I am of opinion that there is a question of grave national policy involved in our 
maintaining these great lines. And the French seeing this, it has been a part of their 
policy for years past to construct a commercial marine of their own, propelled by steam, 
which shall enable them to compete with the large companies of this country. The 
French have seen what the Peninsular and Oriental Company’s ships did in the Cri¬ 
mean war. They then carried upwards of (30,000 men from this country, 2,000 officers, 
and between 11,000 and 12 000 horses. We know, also, what the Peninsular and Ori¬ 
ental Company did at the time of the Indian mutiny. Where should we have been 
if its vessels had not been in existence then to take out our troops and military 
stores? [Hear! Hear!] We know, too, what was done by another company in the 
‘Trent’ affair. We know how 10,000 men were sent out to Canada by the Cunard 
line of steamers and other vessels almost at a day’s notice.” 

OUR SUBSIDIES TO FOREIGN LINES. 

Yes, in America we know that, and we know, too, by the official statistics in the 
Post-Office Department at Washington, that during those years from 1855 to 1870 the 
United States Government was nursing this foreign line to strike back at its own life 
by paying over $3,798,000 to it for carrying our ma'.is. It is strange that our Ameri¬ 
can free-ship advocates never notice facts like this which show how fine a policy it 
is to be dependent upon foreign nations. We were virtually paying a subsidy to the 
Cunard liue. And to pay our money to foreigners for carrying our mails is nothing 
less than to raise up a navy to be turned some time against ourselves. I say what we 
want to do instead is to raise up an auxiliary navy of our own. 

POLITICAL INSANITY. 

But to conclude with Mr. Crawford, he said strongly: “Now I enter my protest 
against any act on the part of Her Majesty’s Government which shall saddle this 
country with a contract either with the Messageries Imp6riales or any other foreign 
company. [Loud and general cheering.] I hold that such a course would be con¬ 
trary to public policy ; that it would be unfair and unjust to the Peninsular and Ori¬ 
ental Company, and that it would be an act of political insanity for us to put such a 
weapon into the bauds of any foreign government whatever; and more especially so 
bearing in mind that the weapon thus put into their hands has been first taken out of 
our own.” [Loud cheers.] 

I call that a sound and national view. We did not accept this view when between 
1855 and 1870, as I have shown, we paid from three to four millions to place such a 
weapon in English hands and had it turned against us by the sending over the Cunard 
ships to Canada to menace us in the “Trent” affair. 


102 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


WHAT THE CONTRACTS ARE. 

Copies of a number of these contracts are herewith presented, and from them you 
can see the liberal terms given. 

I call your attention to a feature in the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company’s con¬ 
tract, ordered by the House of Commons in May, 1852, and executed by the commis¬ 
sioners of admiralty, which is for a term of 11 years, and calls for a payment to the com¬ 
pany by the government of a subsidy of $1,370,000 per annum. By the terms (page 
3) the company Avas compelled when called onto furnish steamers to travel between 
certain degrees of latitude, the pay for every mile so traveled to be $2.50 per mile, 
besides the subsidy. At this rate, if a vessel steamed 8-| knots an hour she would 
earn $500 a day, exclusive of subsidy or mercantile business. This contract was equal 
to 40 per cent, per annum on the capital invested. And when a serious disaster befell 
the company, as the result of a hurricane, the contract was extended two years, also 
allowing $225,000 for insurance aud working expenses. (See contract “ West India 
and Brazil mails,” dated June 26, 1868.) 

FRANCE’S TREATMENT OF HER SHIPPING. 

Look at what France did for her shipping. Here is a nation that had cheaper 
capital and labor even than England, and besides this bought nearly all her ships 
from England—that cheap market which the free-ship advocate wants Americans to 
go to. Yet we find that France paid liberal subsidies to maintain her steamship lines, 
as the following statistics, compiled from official sources, will show. If France, having 
the special advantages of cheap capital and labor to run the ships, and the privilege 
to buy ships in the cheapest market, could not compete with Euglaud withoutpursuing 
a policy of subsidy, declaredly given “for the development of commerce and industry,” 
how can we expect to do it? And what sense is there in the cry that we can regain 
our lost commerce if we only have the chance to buy cheap ships ? 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


103 


c 

I 


* 


p • 

Xi 3 
•a a 
Jo g 

3 84 

cc 


© 

•§« 


£ a 

"g © § 
w 84 


a >> 

• t ~i 

o © 


p 

a 


:t|«C(MOhO>o 

®OOtOOlOX )0 

^OO^OCOWO 

S oo ccT ic cT of o' 

O ^ L' l> C ^ M 




H|CM« H(OJ 

oJOCMOO'OO^i-HCO 

g*ccoo>or>t'-t> 

^c^c^iomioloco 




^OCOCt'XO 

.WOCOOiOTfO 

G 0 OO<MO<M 00 <O 

£ CO T#r CM lO CO rH o' 

g N Tt X lO ^ s 

- ‘O CO CO c- 


00 CO r*T 


5 CO Oi CO n 


00 CO CO <M 


HfCO H«©»|W WleOHcG 

^ <M CO 00 O O CO 
X tc 1C h o CD to 
00 lO lO O Tt« O CO 

ic of O O oo” <M to 

(MO^COCOOO 

<M rH rH 


: •§§§§ • :g 

Sggg£S£S J 

00 00 . . oo 00 Cl 
” ^ ^ © 
£ >. = [g t^JSv* 2 

3 ^ ^ ^"3 3 o 

•“5 *"3 ?I CO ,- S •d 00 

r-i (M O O M r-l .g 

NN^^NN 
© Ort'm O O £5 

tnsgnng 

^ihH H iOiO h 


,<o o 


m ® cc 
© © © 

a s a 


p *. h 

ci tj S o 

m co ob 
© # © # © ^ 
*c *c *c © 

© © © fl 
bJD ct bi - 

se a a £ 

® « cc.2 

® CO cc *• 

© © © jL« 


2 © 
'©'©s© a 

oo_^ a 
© © 3 S 
35^ 


© 


© © © 

ooS<i 


X3 

^ 84 3 

eg .2 § 

a h © 

.3 © b 

S|g 

fe£ 

Pi 3 _ 

CS ©M 
t-S 




: m 


3 <“* 3 

© ®"J § 

s.a 

g1«2 

© ® H p 


2 o 


SL . .. 

CO 00 3*3<XCC t. 
i—liH © «) rH r-l ©oo 

- ~£> 3 - -, 31 - 
bJD^-_>. O ,j 

'3 3 © a's 3 © ® 

t-s^O <, 1^ t- sO' 0 


• 3 

I'd 


: &o 

• S'* 3 

• 3 p 

■ >£ 
© ©v® 

3 3« 3 
e'er © 
+3 3 3 © 
aa rt, g 
3 3 u -J3 

33 & 3 

£ £ 2-a 

a s 

3 g „H 

*<*-8 2 

© ®s© © 


>0 

'd 


o 

H 


,P 

a 


i 










































104 AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 

EXTRACTS OF CLAUSES FROM MAIL CONTRACTS OF THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT WITH 
STEAMSHIP COMPANIES, SPECIFYING CONDITION THEREOF. 

Article 43. 

In case of hostilities or of war the company pledges itself not to suspend the serv¬ 
ice without permission from the government. As long as the company shall not have 
been authorized or shall he without permission to give up the service the government 
shall bear the war risk whereby the company’s property should suffer. 

If, on the other hand, however, the government orders the cessation of the services 
the vessels shall be delivered to the government, with all their material (equipments) 
and provisions. The government may take immediate possession of and use the same 
in any manner as it shall deem proper upon its own judgment, paying as rent an an¬ 
nual sum representing interest at 5 per cent, ot the estimated value that is hereinafter 
specified, and an annuity proportionate to the wear and tear that shall, moreo\er, bo 
allowed to the company" at the time of restoration. 

If the vessels should not be restored the company shall be compensated for their 
value according to the estimate made, when said property should be delivered to the 
government. . . 

During the entire period of the interruption of the service the subsidy hereinabove 
specified shall be discontinued. 


Article 44. 

At the time of declaration of war or requirement estimates of the value of each 
vessel, with equipment, &c., thereof shall be presented by the post-office department 
and by the company to a commission of arbitration, which shall determine between, 
the same the value of each of the said vessels (or property) of the company employed 
in the mail service. 


Article 45. 

In case of capture by the enemy of any such vessel delivered to the government the 
latter shall be obliged to reimburse the company for the value of said vessel, taking 
as a basis of valuation the estimate provided for in the foregoing article. 

Every commission of arbitration whose duty it shall be to decide between the gov¬ 
ernment and the company shall be composed of five members, two of whom shall her 
selected by the company and two by the minister of finance. These four shall select 
a fifth commissioner, who shall be the presiding officer. 

In case of the failure to agree upon a fifth commissioner such designation shall be 
made by the court of the place where the said steamship company is located. 

The fees of the commission shall be paid one-half by the company and one-half by 
the government (post-office department). 

A dditional requiremen ts. 

In case the company shall suspend or cease the service for any cause other than war 
or natural circumstances beyond its control, then the post-office department shall, 
upon a basis of decis’on of experts, take possession of the vessels of said company, 
with all their equipments, &c., and a commission appointed by the minister of finance 
shall determine the amount of forfeit to be paid by the said company, which amount 
shall not exceed the sum of one million francs. 

Under any extraordinary political circumstances, even when there is no maritime 
warfare, the government may take by purchase one or more vessels. 

Under the same circumstances and case of urgency the governor of any French col¬ 
ony who may have to direct the movement of troops may require the embarkation of 
such troops on board of any vessel of such contracting steamship company. 

In botti these cases the indemnity for the sale of charter, as well as that due for 
any damages to which the company may be subjected in the performance of its serv¬ 
ice, shall be fixed by the commission provided for in article 45. 

ENGLAND’S DISPOSITION TOWARDS US. 

In view of her persistent policy from the very foundation of our government to 
drive us from the sea, in view of her vast expenditures of money to gain her point 
with the iron steamship, what mood should we expect England to be in with respect 
to this country when our civil war came? Was it likely she would be found to bo 
our friend? Or was it not likely she would plot to accomplish in that hour her pur- 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


105 


pose to drive us from the sea ? How she did this hv fitting out blockade-runners and 
by giving aid direct and indirect is matter of history? The official records in our 
Naval Department show that in December, 1865, there were 354 vessels and 28,526 
men in our Navy engaged in blockade service, at a cost yearly of over $25,000,000. 
This utterly ruined our marine, as well as prolonged the war. 

As a result, when peace came England carried more than one-half of the commerce 
of the entire world under her flag. And after all the struggles of our earlier states¬ 
men and their prompt meeting of her policy of war and legislation, it was left for this 
later time to produce Americans in and out of Congress who should declare that the 
only way for us to regain anything on the sea of what had been taken from us in our 
extremity is to go to our great rival and marine enemy for ships or material. Woe 
be to the party who will advocate such a policy when the people get to understand 
the subject. 


WHAT THE WAIl DID. 

It has been said that the civil war did not destroy our merchant marine. Assuredly^ 
the war alone did not do it. I have showed the causes that began to operate before 
the war, that operated during the war, and have since continued. But, in conjunction 
with these causes, the war was an added cause that led to the almost utter extinc¬ 
tion of our merchant marine on the North Atlantic. The facts are plain : 

1. 'The war found us totally unprepared. We had no navy to protect the govern¬ 
ment, much less to protect our merchant marine. The government took for its use 
in emergency over 1,000,000 tons of our shipping. The figures of loss are as fol¬ 
lows : 


Tons* 

Navy Department took of our best shipping, principally steam. 565, 978 

War Department took, for transports. 787,611 

Ships sought refuge under foreign flag, since we had no navy to protect them. 801, 311 

Or a total loss during the war of. 1, 854, 900 

Between 1865 and 1875, Americans sold to foreigners, because the former 
could not run them in the foreign trade in competition with cheap cap¬ 
ital, cheap labor, and low taxation. 457,000 

Making a total decline in tonnage of. 2, 311, 900 

WHAT HAD PROTECTION TO DO WITH CAUSING THIS ? 

This loss represented $115,595,000 that was represented in our shipping business. 
This capital was put into other business where it was protected. It might be said, 
from this showing, that onr foreign carrying trade was pretty well broken up by the 
war. But again I ask, what, had protection to do with it? It was just because we 
did not protect shipping in the foreign trade that we could not revive or sustain it. 
Had we treated our factories during the war as we did our ships, we should have 
been without factories as we were without ships when the war wasover. Tooffercap- 
italists free trade in brick, timber, and iron without protection against the cheap 
capital and labor of Europe would be sheer mockery. This is the remedy that 
theorists have been applying to our shipping difficulty. The man who wishes to do 
justice to this case must ask himself the question: On what conditions would he be 
willing to put in his money ? 

But the free-ship advocate may say that we did protect the ship by the navigation 
laws. The navigation laws, it is true, protected the building of the ship, but what 
was wanted was protection for running the ship. That was where we failed, and 
that is the failure government is now called upon to remedy. 

2. But fhe principal fact to be noted m this connection is that when the carrying 
trade of the North Atlantic was thus thrown open, England was prepared, by reason 
of the policy I have shown, and at once seized upon it and firmly established herself 
in it. The result was simply this, that between 1860 and 1870 England’s shipping 
increased about 400 per cent., and when the war was ended she was in full possession 
of the North Atlantic carrying trade, and we were almost wholly out. 

THE CHANCE WE LOST. 

3. Suppose we had met England’s policy in 1840 as we met her at all other times 
before that, and had in our turn encouraged the building of iron steamers to equal 
extent, by equally liberal pay for fast mail service, and by other eucouragiug legisla¬ 
tion. Suppose we had, as a result, not only developed our iron and coal, and stimulated 









106 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


all branches of industry, but also built up a similar fleet of 150 iron steamships, ready 
to be summoned to government service and defense when the war broke out. Why, 
with 75 of these fast steamers we could have both protected our coast and blockaded 
every Southern port, leaving the other 75 ships to carry on our business and take care 
of outside invaders. In that case we might have forced England to pursue a different 
kind of neutrality, and the Alabama and Shenandoah would have had no existence. 
Our war might have been ended within a year, and thousands ot lives and millions 
of dollars saved to our country. What a tremendous sacrifice did we make then tor 
want of a wise policy twenty years before in regard to our shipping interests! Had 
we appropriated twice as many millons a year as England did to encourage building 
such a fleet, would not this expenditure have been saved to us many times over when 
our emergency caine ? 

OUR CONDITION WHEN PEACE CAME. 

Thus we have considered the period before our civil war, and the war period itself, 
in relation to our shipping. Let us now look at the third period, since the close of 
the war in 1865 to the present, and note the additional causes of our shipping decline. 
These are found to be: 1. Taxation and other burdens; 2. Dear capital; 3. Dear 
labor; 4. Pre-occupation of the North Atlantic by other nations; 5. Non-American 
agitation; 6. Lack of legislation and a firm governmental policy ; 7. A currency be¬ 
low par. 

1. What was the condition of affairs when peace was restored ? The war had stimu¬ 
lated internal development. The millions of capital withdrawn from shipping by 
American merchants had been put into railroads, telegraph lines, and factories. There 
was no chance to profitably invest capital in competition with England on the ocean, 
when there was no protection for ir, and naturally this capital sought investment 
where it was protected, and had to compete only with capital equally burdened by 
the high rates of capital, taxation, and labor. 

When the attention of the people began to be drawn to the carryiug trade, what we 
had left of it, it was found that of our remaining tonnage a small proportion was com¬ 
posed of wooden side-wlieel steamers, almost worn out and of little use; the balance 
of wooden sailing ships, many of them also old and comparatively worthless. Although 
during our war the revolution on the ocean—steam for sails, iron for wood, the screw 
for side-wheels, the compound engine for the ordinary—liad been completed, yet at 
its close there was not an iron screw steamer, nor one with a compound engine, under 
our flag. Nothing was left us but wooden sailing ships to compete with England’s 
fleet of modern iron screw steamers already in possession of the business by the en¬ 
couragement of large subsidies as I have shown. We had no yards established for 
the building of iron ships. Our rolling-mills were not in condition to make the shapes 
of iron necessary, nor had we much skilled labor in that direction. Our currency was 
at a discount of 40 per ceut., and we had a tax on the ownership of vessels ten times 
greater than Great Britain’s. Added to this, England had the powerful advantage of 
possession. As business men you well know the difficulty of organizing capital to buy 
ships or anything else in a market for the purpose of competing with capital already 
organized and invested, and especially when the surrounding circumstances are all 
against the new organization. 

THE FALSE CRY FOR FREE SHIPS. 

2. Take the three causes of taxation, wages, and interest. It has been the cry on 
the part of certain men ever since the war closed that “ free ships” was the only 
thing needed to rebuild our lost merchant marine and re-establish ourselves in the 
carrying trade. Let me show you the real facts in the case. 

What was our condition in 1865, when this cry was first raised in Congress? No 
ships but a few worn-out sailing ships and side-wheel steamers. No chance to com¬ 
pete with England’s iron ships by building wooden ones; no facilities in the country 
to build iron ones; the carrying trade already in possession of foreigners, with their 
cheap capital, cheap labor, and low taxation ; truly a poor condition. 

“ Give us free ships,” said the advocates of an English interest to an American Con¬ 
gress. Well, I will show you that if the government liad bought and given ships 
absolutely free to these very advocates, they could not then have run them under the 
American flag. And for these reasons : 

Suppose five 4,000-ton steamers had been given to a company of free-ship men for 
nothing in 1865, the value of the ships being $5,000,000, the account at the end of a 
year would stand thus between him and his English competitor: 


Taxation of American line on its $5,000,000 of property at 2£ per cent. $125, 000 

"Wages, 600 men for the five ships, at $2 per day. 438, 000 

Total taxation and wages, American line. 563, 000 








AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 107 

Interest on $5,000,000 capital, English line, at 4 per cent. 200, 000 

Taxation, 1 per cent, on net earnings, say earnings 0 per cent. 3, 000 

Wages, 600 men, at $1.25 per (lay. 273, 750 

Total running expenses, English line. 476,750 

Difference in favor of English line. 86, 250 


Here is an advantage ol $86,250 a year when the Americans were given their shins 
for nothing, and no account is taken of interest on capital; neither does this take 
. lll t° account tonnage dues nor the special war tax. And since the Americans who 
wanted tree ships—or said they did—could not expect to get them for nothing, how 
would they have stood in the competition when they had turned $7,000,000 of green¬ 
backs into gold (as they must have done if they had used the privilege of going into 
a foreign market for their ships), to buy what the Englishman or Frenchman or Ger¬ 
man could buy tor $5,000,000; and when, besides this, they had paid from 7 to 8 per 
cent, for their capital. Just look at it: 


Running expenses and taxation, American line. $563,000 

Interest on $5,000,000 capital at 7 per cent. 350, 000 

Total cost of American line.... 913,000 

Total cost of English line. 476, 750 

Difference in favor of English line. 436,250 


Now an American company of capitalists would have been very likely to invest in 
English cheap ships in 1865 and subsequently, on those terms of competition, 
wouldn’t they ? 

And yet the free-ship men unblushingly persist in saying, in the face of these fig¬ 
ures, “Only give us free ships and we’ll be all right.” Will we? 

Compare the ship on the sea to the factory on the land. Both require capital for 
the plant and men to operate them. What man could buy a cheap English factory 
and run it on the American principle of high taxes, high capital, and high labor? 
So, in ships, it is not what it costs to get the ship afloat, but what it costs to keep 
her there, under American rates of taxation, interest, and labor, that prevents us 
from owning ships in competition with foreign owners, who employ capital under no 
such disadvantages. 


THE THING TO BE DONE. 

Let our government simply place ns on equal conditions with other peoples, so that 
our capital can be put into competition with foreign capital, with a fair prospect of 
return, and I guarantee that there will be no trouble about first cost. There is no 
trouble in raising capital to be put into large American-built ocean steamers for the 
coasting trade, where it will be subject to the same laws, rates, and taxation as the 
other capital employed in that trade. But when we undertake to put capital into 
the foreign trade, we bring it into competition with the capital of other peoples who 
have more favorable conditions of interest, taxation, and labor, and there we find the 
hunt for capital a vain one. As I have shown, even when England built ships cheaper 
than any other nation, her great success came from her policy of aiding her merchants 
to run them after they were built. 

OUR COAST TRADE PROGRESS. 

3. To show that capital can be obtained when there is a fair chance in the compe¬ 
tition, let me call your careful attention to what we have done in the development of 
our coast carrying trade. This has exceeded, uuder protection, even our unparal¬ 
leled progress in manufacturing industries. The history of the world does not show 
so vast a development as that of our coasting trade in the last ten years. 

Look at the figures. Counting in the contracts already in hand that cannot bo 
completed until 18-2, in the ten years from 1872 we have built 140 iron screw steam¬ 
ships, of a total tonnage of 260,000 tons. We have also built 25 wooden screw steam¬ 
ers, of 27,563 tons. This makes a total steam tonnage built for our coasting aud for¬ 
eign trade of nearly 290,000, 260,000 tons of it iron steamships; while in 1870 there 
did not exist in this country the rolling-mills aud ship-yards required to construct an 
iron ship such as we have to-day. 

Referring for comparison to the ocean-going steam tonnage of the world in 1860, we 
find that it consisted of 338 steamer-, with tonnage of 431,000, divided as follows: 


















108 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Nation. 

No. 

Tonnage. 

Great jRrltRin - -... _ _ ... 

150 

250, 000 

United States .. 

52 

71,000 

A11 nfli^T* nations ...... 

130 

150, 000 

Total ....-.... 

338 

431,000 

Ocean-going steam tonnage built in United States since 1872. 

145 

257, 563 


What a grand showing this is! We have built in ten years more steam ocean-go¬ 
ing tonnage than England possessed in I860, though she began to build the iron ship 
in 1840, and had liberally encouraged the establishment of ship-yards, paying mill¬ 
ions yearly in contracts to induce the investment of capital in the foreign carrying 
trade. 

More than that, in these ten years we have built four times as much steam tonnage 
as we owned in 1860, while that was made up of old side-wlieelers not lit for ocean 
carrying, and have built considerably more than one-half as much steam tonnage as 
was owned by the world in 1860. The ships are hrstclass, and their carrying capacity 
is equal to 772,6">9 tons of sail, the most approved estimates, based on experience,, 
making one tou of steam equal in carrying capacity to three tons of sail. 

Besides this we now have in the foreign trade 80,000 tons of iron screw steamers, or 
ten times more than we had in 1860. 

THE RIGHT KIND OF A “DECLINE.” 

France and Germany made no increase of steam tonnage to compare with ours, 
though they had all the advantages of buying free ships of England (an advantage 
which t he free-ship man claims would have done so much to gain for us a foreign car¬ 
rying trade), while we labored under all the disadvantages of starting a new busi¬ 
ness when the financial condition of the country was unsettled, when gold was at a 
premium, and when, for a part of the time, there was great business depression and 
distress. This is the sort of “ decline” in our ship-building that is due to our pro¬ 
tective theory. We can have just such a “decline” in our foreign shipping trade if 
the government will protect us as it has our coast business, or as the Government of 
England encouraged her ship-owners. 

What has been the result, and what is the advanced condition of the iron ship¬ 
building interest worth to us to-day? Had we possessed these 1*20 steamships in 1861 
we could have thoroughly blockaded our coast, and have brought the rebellion to a 
close within a year. Through our present facilities we should be able to construct a 
similar fleet in much less time. 

Our coasting fleet is superior to the steam fleet of any country except England. 
How is this, do you ask ? Why, we protected the coasting trade the same as we did 
our manufactures, and so saved it; and the result is that the country has a better 
fleet to meet an emergency with than it ever had before. What a benefit, this reduc¬ 
tion has been to our own people, and yet it has been produced by competition among 
ourselves! 


A PROOF OF WHAT WE CAN DO WITH A RIGHT POLICY. 

What we have done with the iron ship since 1872, in the face of financial discourage¬ 
ment, is sufficient proof of what we can do to regain our place as ocean carriers, if a per¬ 
manent policy and a wise one be adopted by the nation. It is no small thing to be 
able to say that this country is to-day the second iron ship-building country of the 
world—second only to England—and that, without reducing the cost of American 
labor, we have reduced the original costof the iron ship to within 12per cent, of what 
it is in England, and can build a ship having no superior anywhere. I am satistied 
that our ten years’ record in iron ship-building is such a record as ought to stop the 
mouths of the men who declare that Americans cannot build iron ships and must de¬ 
pend upon England for them. What we want is a wise policy to enable the mer¬ 
chant.to run the ship after it is built, and then we shall succeed. 

Then, too, what a vast benefit has this coast trade been in the reduction of freight, 
and especially to the South ! 

Why, the freight rate on cotton, that was $6.75 per bale in i860 from Galveston to 
New York, was in 1882 only $2.25, and the same is true of cotton shipped from New 
Orleans, Mobile. Savannah, &c. Here is a freight saving to the Southern people in 
the matter of cotton alone of some $4,000,000 a year. 





















AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


109 


ship-owners’ grievances. 

4. But let us look at some other grievances of which the American ship-owner has 
to complain. Take the report of the Postmaster-General of the United States for the 
year ending June 30, 1881, and turn to page 46. Ir is there officially announced that 
the department received from postages collected on United States mail matter sent 
to foreign countries the sum of $1,560,070.00, and on page 40 in the same report the 
Postmaster-General says that the entire cost for transporting the mails to foreign 
•countries was $239,141.21, thus leaving a profit to the department of $1,321,548.69. 
The law requires the American ship, sailing to foreign countries, to carry the mails for 
sea postage, which means every time a loss to the ship. 

Again, last year, so the official report of the department says, the consuls of the 
United States in foreign ports collected from the few ships which we have in the 
service, in way of fees, tonnage dues, certification, &c., tlieenormous sum of $830,000. 
The United States appropriated the sum of $750,000 for the support of the consular 
service abroad, yet these consuls turn into the Treasury of the United States $830,000, 
or $80,000 more than the appropriation for their support, and the Secretary of State 
announces that “the consular service abroad is self-sustaining.” He does not state, 
however, that it is sustained at the expense of the limited commerce which we have 
with foreign countries. 

Now I ask you to contrast the practice of the English Government. Last year the 
English Government appropriated the sum of $1,300,000 for her consular service, 
while the entire sum in fees, &e., collected from English ships was only $200,000. 
The English foreign trade is four times greater than our own, yet they only collect 
one-quarter the sum from her shipping that we did. What does this show? It 
shows, gentlemen, that the charges upon our foreign shipping are 1,200 per cent, 
higher than the same charges upon English shipping. 

Amount tonnage dues collected : 


1875. $1,014,045 05 

1876.. * . 1,135,232 58 

1877 . 1,227,299 82 

1878 . 1,336,627 68 

1879 . 1,462,267 97 

1880 . 1,610,383 84 

1881 . 1,588,823 87 


Total. 9, 374, 680 81 

Expense of collecting same. 70,000 00 


Actual profit in seven years. 9, 304, 680 81 


MEASUREMENT LAWS UNJUST. 

According to our present laws for the measurement of steam vessels, we measure 
the whole vessel, including officers’ quarters, engine and boiler space, and coal-bunk¬ 
ers, and charge tonnage fees on all, while all other nations measure only the net 
carrying capacity of the ship. This makes an extra charge against American ships 
in ail parts of the world of 33£ per cent, tonnage dues more than the ships of any 
other nation. 

9 It affects the American ship during her time in service in the following manner: 

While loading at her wharf, 33^ per cent, more wharfage. 

When in dry-dock for repairs, 33£ per cent, more for dockage. 

When going through the Suez Canal, 33£ per cent, more for tonnage. 

While laying up at wharf and not in service, 33£ per cent, more expenses. 

It seems that the American ship in foreign trade has been loaded down with all 
kinds of unnecessary burdens. Strange to say, the men who for fifteen years have 
been advocating free ships as the only remedy have never seen any of these difficulties; 
or, if they have, never suggested their removal. It is time for a change. 

WHAT CAN WE DO ? 

But, it is asked, how can we ever hope to enter into the competition? What shall 
we do ? I answer, the American mechanic, manufacturer, and merchant, the Ameri- 
< 3 an sailor, ask no protection for brains, push, or ingenuity. All they ask is an equal 
chance in the competition. I have shown that dear capital, well-paid labor, and 
hit»li taxes cannot compete in manufacturing or ship-owning with low taxes, cheap 
labor, and cheap capital. 

1. For answer as to what we can do, I have shown what England did, and that 














110 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


with her iron interest well developed, able to build the iron ship cheaper than any 
other nation, with all the advantages of cheap labor, cheap capital, and low taxa¬ 
tion. 1 have shown, also, what France did. What is Germany talking of doing ? 
Prince Bismarck, in a recent speech, recognized the wisdom of the new French policy, 
said it would “create for France a powerful navy, which may prove of effecti ve serv¬ 
ice in time of war,” and declared that the “merchant service is the handmaid of all 
other industries, of agriculture and commerce. On the day when the freight trade 
is given over to foreigners,” he therefore concluded, “a mortal blow will be dealt to 
all the industries of the country. These enterprises cannot dispense with govern¬ 
ment aid, and this has always been afforded in a productive manner, as soon as it 
was a question of paving the way for our traffic in distant markets. England ha& 
given the example of using mail steamers as the pioneers for the creation or expan¬ 
sion of commercial relations.” These are the words of one of the keeuest statesmen 
of Europe, and they are true words. We need ships to pave the way to traffic in new 
and distant markets, and, as Prince Bismarck says, these enterprises cannot dispense/ 
with a government policy of protection and encouragement. 

THE KEY TO THE QUESTION. 

% 

2. The key to unlock the world’s commerce is the fast mail ship. I have showed 
how England used it. How did the United States turn this key? The story is a 
pitiful one. Our government has actually discriminated against ships engaged in the 
foreign trade as against the coasting. For instance, the ship in the coasting trade, 
if needed to carry the mails, is treated the same as railways, stage coaches, or inland 
steamboats, and paid for the service performed; but if that slim be engaged in the 
foreign trade, and the government desires to send a mail to a foreign country the 
owner is obliged to take the mails and carry them to destination with little or no 
compensation therefor, under the statute already quoted. 

The following table will show you how this law operates against the American ship 
engaged in the foreign trade ? 


Lines. 

Number ships. 

Miles traveled. 

Mail pay. 

New York to San Francisco, China, Japan, Australia, and return . 

Brazil line, New York to Saint Thomas. Para, Pernambuco, Bahia, and 
Kio .. -........ 

18 

3 

3 

3 

5 

681, 877 

140,000 

128, 960 
43, 472 
187, 000 

$24, 410 

1,875 
*2, 444 
*76 
2, 600 

Havana line, New York to Havana. 

South Side line, New York to Santiago de Cuba. 

Mexican line, New York to Vera Cruz.... 

Total... 

32 

1,181, 309 

31,405 



* The Havana line had to pay $600 for bringing mail from quarantine by special boat, and $520 cost 
of delivery and collection, leaving a net mail earning of $1,324. The South Side line paid for mail 
expressage, in its sixteen trips, $160, leaving a net loss for carrying the mails of $83.06. 


Contrast with this showing the following, which gives the amount paid annually 
to five lines which carry the mails in the coasting trade: 


Lines. 

Miles 

traveled. 

Mail pay. 

Galveston to Brashear, Tex. 

58, 500 
48, 880 
60, 680 
16, 020 
54, 880 

$50, 000 
18, 000 
25, 000 
34,800 
14. 906 

Cedar Keys to Key West, Fla. 

San Francisco to Portland, Oreg. 

Portland to Sitka.7. 

Portland to Astoria. 

Total. 

247, 960 

142, 706 



Thus the account stands: 

Lines in foreign trade carry mails 1,181,309 miles for. $31,405 

Lines in coasting trade carry mails 247,960 miles for. 142, 706 

Lines in foreign trade carry more miles by 933,349 for less pay by. Ill’ 301 







































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Ill 


Or, counting by miles, the pay for carrying foreign mails is 2£ cents per mile, while for 
domestic mails it is 57£ cents per mile. 

That is the discrimination we make against capital the moment it is put into the 
foreign trade. The Mexican Government alone pays $134,000 a year for mail service 
to this country, or nearly as much as we pay for all our foreign mail service 
What had protection to do with this? 


THE ONLY WAY TO OWN IS TO BUILD AT HOME. 

The drain consequent upon buying ships abroad proves too great to be borne. 
Could England ever have owued and maintained her $654,000,000 worth of ships if 
she had had to buy them from another country ? To keep this fleet up, not counting 
the annual cost of repairs, to build the new ships required to replace those lost and 
worn out, and to meet the demands of increased trade, costs not less than ten per 
cent, of the whole value, or $57,000,000 yearly. Could any nation expect to main¬ 
tain such a mighty interest as this if, instead of being able to build its ships and 
tools, it was dependent upon another nation for them, and must annually send mill¬ 
ions upon millions abroad to support the working people of that other nation ? 
Could we afford to own such a fleet if we had bought it abroad ? Could we pay 
out annually the millions necessary to keep it renewed ? What effect would the 
taking of that great amount of labor out of our market have upon that market, and 
what effect in comparison upon the market which we favored with it ? These ques¬ 
tions are of deep importance in seeking a solution of our shipping problem. It 
should be our ambition to occupy the place that properly belongs to us on the ooean. 
To do that would require an outlay of $200,000,000 of capital within the next ten 
years; and the constaut increase of our surplus products for export would render 
necessary an increased outlay year by year, with the sums needed for renewal added. 
Could we send that vast amount out of this country, and could we forever keep 
sending it out ? No; that capital is labor, and no country that cannot build ships 
can afford to own them, and we should be forever dependent upon England. 

THE FREE MATERIAL FALLACY. 

A few words uow on the question of free material, which is constantly agitated. 
It is asked, what would be the effect upon our shipping of allowing raw material for 
the ship to come in free of duty, as under sections 2513 and 2514 ? 

No effect at all. I have made it clear that we do not build ships for the foreign 
trade simply because our merchants cannot run them there. In the first place, I can 
say this, that though I have built vessels for the foreign trade to the extent of 
$10,000,000 since this law was enacted, I have never once made use of it. And I be¬ 
lieve I should not be so foolish as not to do so if it were to any advantage. The whole 
thing is a sham. 

It is a favorite argument with some who seem to think a ship’s cost is ninety-five 
per cent, for material and five for labor, instead of the exact reverse. The labor, which 
makes up ninety-five per cent, of the cost, is free. They land here every day by the 
thousand; but the day they land here they want American wages. It is right they 
should. As for free material I have studied every way practicable to see how near 
we could come to compete with Great Britain in the product of the ship. In 1872, 
when I undertook to build some large ships, the rolling mills did not exist in this 
, country that could make the angles, plates, and beams required. I then had to pay 
£12 10s. in gold for plates, £11 10s. for angles, £1 per ton freight by steam, and five 
per cent, commission. This satisfied me of the folly of a man’s trying to bring a dis¬ 
tance of three thousand five hundred miles the heavy material required for a ship, 
paying freight and commissions, and putting that material into a ship, at our high 
rates of labor, in competition with a man whose ship-yard is close by where the ma¬ 
terial is produced, and who has cheaper labor, no freight or commission to pay, and 
lower rates of taxation. 

From the Clyde to the Delaware or Hudson is over three thousand miles. The im¬ 
practical man tells the American ship-builder that the thing he needs to enable him 
to build ships is to bring the material from the Clyde and put it into ships in compe¬ 
tition with the ship-builder over there. Now, who would think of taking the iron 
from the Delaware to the Kennebec—a vastly shorter distance—and asking the builder 
there to put it into iron ships in competition with the iron ship-builder on the Dela¬ 
ware, who had no freight to pay ? Or who would think of bringing wood from Maine- 
to Delaware to build wooden ships in competition with the Maine builders ? The 
idea is so preposterous that no practical man would entertain it. It is plain that the 
freight and commission paid by the American builder in bringing material from the 
Clyde would be a large profit for the English builder. Why, even the short distance 
from the Clyde to the Thames was so much of a disadvantage that it broke up the 


112 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


sliip-yards on the Thames, and the builders there had to move up to the Clyde in 
order to join in the competition. If builders, with all other conditions equal, could 
not stand a few miles’ freightage, how could we hope to compete when obliged to 
bring material over three thousand miles? Why did not England succeed when she 
imported the wood from us free, with cheaper capital and labor ? 

Again, I would like to ask the theorist how far advanced this material would be, 
'when it arrived in this country, toward a finished ship? It must go through several 
processes, from the ore to the pig, from the pig to puddled blooms, thence into rolled 
muck-bars, thence into plates, angles, bars, and beams. These last shapes are the 
most advanced until it is put into the ships, yet from this advanced stage there is 
yet sixty per cent, of the ninety-five per cent, labor to be expended before it is 
wrought into the finished ship. How does the advocate of free material propose to 
aid the American builder to meet his competitor on the Clyde, who pays for this sixty 
per cent, of labor fifty per cent, less than the American builder? While in addition 
the American builder has to pay freight and commission where the Clyde builder has 
the material at home. Would this in any case be a just law ? 

THE DANGER OF DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGNERS. 

Our surplus products sent by ship to foreign markets amounted in 1870 to about 
*2, 500,000 tons; in 1880, to over 15,000,000 tons, valued at $1,589,472,093 ; and in 1890, 
at anything like a proportionate increase, will be upwards of 50,000,000 tons. We 
have for many years been paying from $70,000,000 to $100,000,000 a year in freight 
money to foreign carriers; are now paying $140,000,000, and this amount must increase 
proportionately with our exports. Our products are carried almost entirely in for¬ 
eign bottoms, and are therefore liable at any time to be endangered by foreign com¬ 
plications. Suppose the three nations which are doing the principal part of our car¬ 
rying—England, France, and Germany—should become involved in war. The first 
thing would be to attack each other’s ships, and in destroying those ships destroy our 
products. We might then have the unpleasant experience of seeing the fleets of hos¬ 
tile nations lying in wait off Sandy Hook to prey upon any ship that ventured to put 
out to sea loaded with our cargoes. What means have we to guard this great inter¬ 
est? What redress could national law give us in such a case? What could we do to 
secure the carrying of our products, having no ships of our own nor the skilled labor 
to produce them, and being unable to buy them of England in such emergency? 
What danger should we then be in through pursuing a policy of dependence upon 
foreign carriers and ship-builders? Would we for a moment allow our railroad sys¬ 
tem of transportation to be subject to such risks and chances ? Yet is not the steam¬ 
ship line simply the continuation of the trunk-line road to market ? We cannot be 
safe unless the whole road is equally under our control at all times. Has the United 
States to-day this control or the power to procure it in case of sudden requirement ? 
In this I have only pointed out what would be our condition if we were not directly 
involved in the war. I need not comment on what our condition would be if we were 
a party to it. 

We have, it is true, a comparatively small amount of tonnage left in the foreign 
trade. But what protection has government even for the little that is left ? The 
mention of our Navy only excites a smile. We have practically no means of protec¬ 
tion whatever for any of these national interests. We could not to-day properly re¬ 
pulse an attack made by the weakest naval power of Europe. To face the facts 
squarely is the surest way to a remedy. 

Italy has been thoroughly investigating her shipping decline, and the commission 
has decided that home ship-building must be encouraged if anything is to be done; 
and so will recommend a bounty law similar to that of France, with so much pay per 
mile for .every mile run in the general lines of trade. 

IN WHOSE INTEREST IS THE FREE-SHIP ADVOCATE WORKING? 

If we take our true position on the ocean, what will be our future wants ? I have 
showed that we now need an investment of $75,000,000 iu ships to enable us to take 
our fair share of the carrying of our own products. At the prospective rate of in¬ 
crease to 50,000,000 tons to be carried in 1890, we should by that time require $75,000,000 
more capital invested in fast iron steamers in the foreign trade to keep up our share 
in carrying the increased product. Ninety per cent, of this $150,000,000 put into ships 
represents labor. If we buy these ships abroad we part with the 90 per cent, and lose 
the profits, and are still just as dependent on foreigners for ships as when we begun. 
If we introduce the policy of free material the forms and shapes in which this mate¬ 
rial would come would be equal to one-halt the cost of the ship, and we should send 
90 per cent, of that amount to support foreign labor, and to encourage the develop¬ 
ment of all the varieties of mechanical arts required to bring the ore into these forms 


AMERICAN SHiPPING INTERESTS. 


113 


and shapes. In both cases we should simply be talcing the money from American 
labor and giving it to foreign labor, aiding also thereby to train for a foreign nation 
skilled workmen. 


A REMEDY PROPOSED. 

The French law, enacted a year or more ago, provides first for a bounty to the ship¬ 
builder equal to the difference between the cost of the ship in England and Franco; 
and, second, when the ship is constructed and registered in the name of the owner, 
gives him a bounty for thirty years for iron ships and twenty years for wooden ships 
in the foreign trade. In consideration, these ships become a part of the government 
in case of war, to be taken at government valuation, and in peace are the carriers of 
the French mails. I am opposed to this first provision, giving a construction bounty 
to the ship-builder or the ship-owner ; for what is to hinder the owner from getting 
a ship built cheap by this means and then selling it to foreigners? So that when the 
ship was thus sold the bounty would be lost. 

The real advantage to a nation is in both building and owning ships; and what¬ 
ever is done should be done to secure the latter, for the ship’s gross earnings during 
her life of twenty years are more than fourteen times her cost. 

If you give the owner a bounty to run the ship in the foreign trade, the bounty 
aids him in the construction of the ship, yet it only lasts while he continues to run the 
ship, and so keeps him an owner. 

I would give, therefore, a bounty to the American ship-owner, who \vill run ships 
where they are demanded in the interests of our commerce. I would govern this bounty 
in amount by the speed and tonnage of the vessels, beginning with a certain sum and 
gradually receding each year for a term of years till the bounty disappears. By such 
a system as this, judiciously pursued, I believe our place on the ocean could gradually 
toe regained and held. 

Where the plans of the ships were approved by a competent naval board, with view 
to usefulness and efficiency for naval purposes in case of emergency, an added bounty 
of, say, fifteen per cent, should be given. This, with the expenditure of a few mill¬ 
ions a year, would do more to give us a navy than anything we are likely to do oth¬ 
erwise. 

Besides this, in order to keep all the labor at home and to use home material, it 
would be effective to allow a drawback of one half the duty on all the material used 
in the ship’s construction that was made at home—the iron, steel, &.c. This would 
encourage the production at home, and would produce a far different result from the 
free-material fallacy pressed by the free-trader. 

This is the remedy that a practical experience suggests to me. A fair mail compen¬ 
sation for whatever mail service the government demands, and a bounty to the ship¬ 
owner sufficient simply to enable him to enter upon the competition with the foreign 
ship-owners who are already in possession of the foreign carrying trade, would induce 
the investment of capital, and would give us an opportunity to begin the building up 
of a merchant marine such as our future commercial prosperity and national security 
alike demand. 


Washington, D. C., 

November 21, 1882. 

Hon. O. D. Conger, 

Chairman of Select Joint Committee on American Commerce : 

Sir : Permit me to present, by way of supplement, to the committee the following 
suggestions touching the subject of American commerce, its present condition and 
its prospective revival. 

The French Government has tried the experiment of free ships and free materials 
during the past twenty years ; so, also, has the Italian Government, both purchasing 
their ships and materials in England, but the experiment has not proved a success, 
nor did it accomplish the object intended. 

After this experience of twenty years the French have passed a law repealing the 
free material law, and among its provisions are the following: It recommends and 
provides that a bounty shall be paid.for the construction of ships built in France 
■equal to the difference between the cost there and in England, and a further bounty 
to the owner or owners of such ships so built, when they are registered, of a stated 
sum per mile for every mile they travel while in foreign trade. This bounty applies 
to both wood and iron vessels, whether propelled by sail or steam. One ton of steam 
power is equal in capacity to three tons of sail, and the bounty in such case is as 
three to one in favor of steam. 

067 - 8 



114 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


This bounty, under the terms of the law, is to continue thirty years, gradually de¬ 
creasing, howeyer, each year until the full term expires and the bounty is wholly 
worked out. The law further provides for an extra allowance for ships of great speed, 
capable of being converted into an auxiliary navy if required, and iu time of peace 
to be used in carrying the mail. 

Following by analogy the plan adopted by Frauce as above outlined, I would rec¬ 
ommend that the bounty commence from the date the ships enter into commission if 
new ships, and expire in twenty years if the ships be built of iron, and in twelve 
years if built of wood, but for ships now running no bounty whatever should be paid 
for an iron ship built longer than twelve years or for a wooden ship built longer than 
eight years. Further as to ships already built the bounty should be graduated accord¬ 
ing to their age and what proportion of their usefulness has been spent. Ships, like 
living things, have a period of life. 

Iu order to define the difference to the nation in building and owning ships, instead 
of relying on foreign vessels to conduct her carrying trade, take the case of an ordi¬ 
nary iron steamer. In order that such a steamer may l>e enabled to pay to her owners 
a dividend of 8 per cent, her gross earnings each year must amount to 75 per cent, of 
her original cost, and if we estimate the life of a ship at twenty-one years in that 
time she will have earned sixteen times her original cost, but a large portion of this 
must be expended for labor and the cost of keeping the ship in order. 

Of these earnings a large proportion, if she be an American ship, is necessarily 
spent in America in the pay of her officers and crew, in provisioning the ship, and in 
necessary repairs and oufits. Besides, as she has American owners, the net earnings 
are also expended in America. On the other hand, foreign ships carrying our products 
are officered and manned by foreigners, the bulk of whose pay is expended abroad,, 
and the money required for repairs and outfits is in like manner expended. The same 
is true with respect to the net earnings. 

What we need to accomplish is such means as will enable us to run ships with 
profit to the owner. Do this and ships will be built. Fail to do this and the growth 
of our commerce in our ow n bottoms will continue to be slow and be confined to that 
which our geographical position, and nothing else, gives us the control of. These 
little places in the field of commerce we have filled ; the restrictive laws of our 
own country in connection with the liberal laws of foreign countries have limited 
the scope of our commercial intercourse to those countries and those only whose 
geographical situation admits us on something like an equal footing. 

Less than one-half that the French law provides will be sufficient to effect a build¬ 
ing up of our merchant marine. With respect to bounties to ship-builders, however, 

I am unqualifiedly opposed, and for the following reason : The bounty so given will 
enable the builder to construct his ship for less money. It is really in such a case in 
reduction of the cost of the ship, or at any rate an element of certain profit. Such 
being the case, what is to prevent a builder after his bounty has been paid from sell¬ 
ing the vessel to a foreign owner, thus putting his cheap ship in competition with 
such of our vessels as were built earlier. Again, if bounty should be paid to the 
builder, and the ship should be sold to a foreign ow ner or lost the bounty would be 
lost and the country would be in no respect the gainer, except in the profits of labor 
in her construction. On the other hand, the bounty should be given to the owner of 
the vessel, and be only given to him while he is running her in the foreign trade; in 
that case if he should sell the ship, or if he should withdraw her from that trade, or 
it she should be lost, the bounty ceases. In other words no bounty should be paid 
unless for that service which will be of benefit to the country at large. 

It is often asked why we do not build ships in our yards as cheaply as in England. 
The answer is easy. The difference arises from the cost of labor. Suppose, by way 
of illustration, that it takes 50,000 days’ work in an American ship-yard to build a 
ship, or 100,000 days from the mine and forest to the finished ship, then the difference 
between the cost of labor here and in other countries, England, for example, will 
show the increased cost here. The number of days’ work required to man such a 
ship, say a fast iron screw mail steamer of 3,000* tons, and to run her, is fifty per 
cent, each year of the cost of labor in constructing her originally in the yard after 
the iron is received in the proper forms and shapes; so that at the end of two 
yedrs, there will have been expended as much for labor in running such a ship as in 
constructing her, and during the life* of such ship the aggregate cost of running her 
would be ten times her original cost for labor in the yard. 

Then, when you own the ship, the question arises how will she be manned ? In 
former times, and when we fostered our merchant marine, the answer would not have 
been difficult. Such vessels, of course, should be officered and manned, if at all, by 
citizens of the United States. Such a ship, so officered and manned by American la- 
boi, built by Amei ican capital, and villi the earnings of her officers and crew largely 
spent in the American market, is a floating factory, and what factory can be kept, in 
operation on that policy of free trade which would give the right to import the fac¬ 
tory as a whole or the raw material to build it and then operate it with American 


AMERICAN SHIPriNG INTERESTS. 


115 


capital bearing a liigh rate of interest and American bigli-paid labor, American in¬ 
dustry thus overweighted being put in competition with the cheap capital and the 
very cheap labor of Europe? And if the difference of first cost is the only reason 
why we are not ship-owners (and that difference is from fifteen to twenty per 
cent.), how does it happen that there are many manufacturers whose plant lias cost 
them fully that excess over their neighbors in the same business, and yet they do not 
complain. But if such manufacturers had to pay one hundred per cent, more for 
their capital invested, from forty to fifty per cent, more for their labor, a id large 
sums beside for taxes and incidental expenses, the result becomes a mathematical cer¬ 
tainty—they must close or become bankrupt. 

If Congress would foster American commerce it can do so by an appropriation ju¬ 
diciously and wisely made, throwing open to the whole country such a bounty as I 
have suggested, the same to be graduated according to the classes of vessels to be put 
in service, one allowance to be for fast mail steamers, capable of performing naval 
service if required, another and less allowance for vessels of less size, speed, &c. 
Also the allowance should be further graduated by the materials of which ships are 
built and the power by which they are propelled, as iron or wood, steam or sail 
power. The bounty in all cases to be confined to vessels in the foreign trade, and 
only to be given as they perform service. 

Can our merchant marine be built up without increasing the burdens of taxation 
on the people? This is a question of the highest importance, and the utility of the 
increase being admitted the only thing in the way is the possible increase of taxation. 
Can this be avoided ? I think it can, and in this way: We have now eight navy- 
yards and one naval station. In these yards during the past year, in fact during 
several years past, not a single ship or marine engine has been constructed, nor are 
we'educating in those yards, as they should be educated, a single mechanic, in case 
of war to-day, of how little use would be those navy-yards! Resort would, neces¬ 
sarily, have to be had to our private yards or to foreign builders; for while in these 
navy-yards no vessels have been built for several years, I have built during the past 
year, in my building yard on the Delaware, no less than 2*2,000 tons of iron ships, 
while, in the same time, more vessels were repaired at my New York establishment 
than in the entire eight navy-yards. 

Suppose that the business I am doing was divided into eight parts, distributed as 
navy-yard work is among eight different yards, each with a costly plant and a civil 
establishment which the officers are bound to maintain, what would the work done 
in such yards cost and what relation would such cost bear to the cost of similar work 
under existing circumstances ? Yet this is the exact case of the government, and the 
expense of the navy-yards is maintained even when no work is being done in them, 
except, perhaps, some paltry repairs. And in this connection permit me respectfully 
to suggest that if four at least of the navy-yards could be closed, (preserving them, 
however, and keeping their appliances intact and in condition for an emergency), the 
sum thus saved would be ample to provide for the payment of bounty to vessels to 
be engaged in the foreign trade. By this plan more ships can be called into commis¬ 
sion and many of the cadets and all of the graduates of the Naval Academy may be 
profitably employed in “ the piping times of peace,” who are now on “waiting or¬ 
ders” or on “furlough” because the number of navy vessels is insufficient to give 
them employment. The fast cruisers when built will no doubt be useful as navy ves¬ 
sels, but no more so than fast mail steamers, designed on emergency to be converted 
into navy vessels. It is certainly contrary to the spirit of our institutions that navy 
officers should be without employment, but they must continue to be for long periods 
while we lack both a cruising navy and a merchant marine, in which latter, by per¬ 
mission, as was done prior to the late war, many gallant and able officers might seek 
and obtain profitable employment in the line of their profession, and if something is 
not done soon in the direction of favoring our merchant marine which will prevent 
the putting of navy officers on “ waiting orders” or “furlough” the Navy will soon 
be rid, by resignation, of its best officers. Assuredly if I should in my establishment 
follow the course in this respect which now obtains in the Navy I would be unable 
to keep my best men a single day. 

The views I have herein expressed are susceptible of greater elaboration than I can 
now give to them. Such as they are, however, I beg to lay them before the com¬ 
mittee, and in doing so subscribe myself, 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

JOHN ROACH. 

p. s.—The law passed last Congress gave great relief to American ship-owners as 
regards the measurement of the ship. I would not repeal the present law, as a large 
amount of what is collected is collected from foreign ships. In 1881 the amount col¬ 
lected was $1,5$8,8*23.87. The total amount collected from 1875 to 1881, inclusive, was 
$3,374,680.81. The cost of collecting this was not more than $70,000, leaving a profit 
to the government in those years of$9,304,000. A large portion of this amount is col- 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


116 

lected from foreign tonnage. Why not apply the amount collected from foreign ton¬ 
nage to aid in building up our foreign shipping ? 

To pass a free ship bill in the American Congress would be legislating directly in 
The interest of Great Britain’s shipping, and would be a most damaging blow to our 
■own shipping interests, not because our merchants would buy ships, for if they 
bought them they would not run them under our present circumstances in competi¬ 
tion with the treatment Great Britain gives her ships when needed on the sea. The 
passage of such a law would aid the foreign shipping of England, France, and Ger¬ 
many as follows : England has $680,000,000 invested in ships ; France about one- 
tenth as much, or $68,000,000, and Germany about $85,000,000. These three nations 
do the most of our foreign carrying trade. England’s ships is her only means of 
reaching the markets of the world with her manufactured goods and bringing back 
breadstuff's to feed her people, and raw material. France for years past has seen her 
weakness, and fortified herself with a navy of 360 war ships. If a European war 
arose to-morrow involving England, France, and Germany the navies of each nation 
would destroy the others’ ships, sinking our products in these very ships because we 
■cannot carry those products ourselves. In case a free ship bill were passed, and such 
a war arose, these nations would transfer these ships to temporary American own¬ 
ership by bills of sale, mortgages, and private guarantees long enough to protect 
them while this war lasted, thus making a cat’s paw of our government for their own 
protection. Where should we get our ships then ? If we had to depend on England 
for them under these conditions she could not supply them. If such a law were 
passed both England and France could dispense to-morrow with a large portion 
-of their present navy, by the protection we would give them under these condi¬ 
tions. To test the honesty of these free ship advocates, give them a rightto go abroad 
and buy ships for a term of ten years, provided they pay duty on the whole ship 
equal to the duty on the construction of the ship and her whole outfit. 

The following copies of postal contracts between the Euglish Government and 
warious steamship lines were submitted by Mr. Roach to the committtee at its sessions 
in New York and are made a portion of his statement: 

ROYAL MAIL STEAM PACKETS FOR COLONIZING IN SOUTH AMERICA. 

doutract ordered by the House of Commons, May, 1852, and executed by the commis¬ 
sioners of admiralty at the office of lord high admiral of Kingdom. 

The vessels required for this service consisted of not less than fifteen wooden vessels, 
ten of them with engines of 4U0 horse power, four with engines of 250 horse power, 
and one with engine of 60 horse power, also one sailing vessel of 100 tons burden. 
(See page 1.) 

Term of contract to commence 1st day of January, 1851, and continue in force for 
eleven years and then determine on a twelve months’ notice by either party. (See 
page 9.) 

Payment to the company of a sum of £270,000 per annum, or $1,370,000, to run be¬ 
tween Southampton, England, and Rio de Janeiro, touching at Lisbon, Madeira, 
Teneriffe, St. Vincent, Pernambuco, and Bahia, and return, and a route from Rio 
de Janeiro to Buenos Ayres and return, called the River Platte route, to meet the 
homeward and outbound steamers to Southampton. The company were compelled 
when called on to furnish steamers to travel between certain degrees of latitude, and 
were paid (besides the subsidy) 9s. 10 d. for every mile, or $2.50 for every mile, so 
traveled; say, if a vessel steamed 8£ knots an hour she would earn $500 a day, ex¬ 
clusive of subsidy or mercantile business. 

The fifteen wooden vessels spoken of in the contract could not possibly cost over 
$3,000,000. Now the $1,375,000 subsidy was equal to 40 per cent, per annum on the 
capital invested, and it goes to show that England intended to rule the ocean before 
she ever built an'iron ship. 

I ask you, gentlemen of the committee, if England confined her aid to letting her 
merchants buy from us wooden ships or timber free of duty, with her cheap capital 
and cheap labor, would this line ever had an existence ? Besides the above subsidies, 
coal was expensive in those countries, and a condition entered in the contract that any 
advance in the price of coal should be compensated for. Certainly this is a very rad¬ 
ical system of protection against the marine of the world. 

This contract was used to colonize and establish with a firm foot-hold English mer¬ 
cantile houses in South America, and also to encourage a number of steamers to run 
between certain latitudes under the orders of the board of admiralty to break down 
-competition against England’s interest. 

Admiralty had power to buy or charter all or any of said vessels. * (See page 8.) 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


117 


ROYAL MAIL STEAM PACKETS. 

Return to an Order of the Honourable the House of Commons, dated 4 May 1852; for, a re- 
any existing Contracts between the Government and the Royal Mail Company and 
Pacific Steam Navigation Company respectively ; specifying the Length or Lumber of Miles 
of the respective Voyages ; the Lumber of Ports required to be called at on each Voyage , the 
Speed, if any, stipulated, and the Amount of Annual Grant to each Company .” 

Admiralty, 6 May, 1852. J. H. IIay, Chief Clei'k. 

Ordered, by the House of Commons, to be printed, 7 May 1852. 

A Return ot existing Contracts between tlie Government and the Royal Mail Company 
and Pacific Steam Navigation Company respectively; specifying the Length or 
Number ot Miles of the respective Voyages; the Number of Ports required to be 
called at on each Voyage ; the. Speed, if any, stipulated ; and the Amount of Annual 
Grant to each Company. 


Articles of Agreement made this 5th day of July in the Year of our Lord 1850, between 
the Commissioners for executing the Office of Lord High Admiral of the United 
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (for and on behalf of Her Majesty) of the one. 
part and “the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company” of the other part 

Witness that the said company hereby covenant promise and agree with the said! 
commissioners for and on behalf of Her Majesty that the said Company shall and will 
at all times during the continuance of this Contract or so long as the whole or any 
part ot the service hereby agreed to be performed ought to be performed in pursuance 
thereof provide maintain keep seaworthy and in complete repair and readiness for 
the purpose of conveying as hereinafter provided all Her Majesty’s mails (in which 
all Despatches and Bags of Letters are agreed to be comprehended) which shall at any 
time and from time to time by the said Commissioners or Her Majesty’s Postmaster- 
General, or any of the Officers or Agents of the said Commissioners or Postmaster-Gen¬ 
eral, be required to be conveyed a sufficient number (uot less than fifteen) of good sub¬ 
stantial and efficient steam vessels ten of such vessels to be built of wood and to be of 
such construction and strength as to befit and able to carry guns of the largest calibre 
now used on board of Her Majesty’s Steam Vessels of War, and each of such vessels to 
be always supplied with first-rate appropriate steam engines of not less than 400 col¬ 
lective horse power four other of such vessels to be employed intereolonially only 
each of which is to be always supplied with fiivt-rate appropriate steam engines of 
not less than 250 collective horse power and the remaining vessel to have a steam 
engine or engines of not less than (50 horse power the said vessels to be of such con¬ 
struction and strength as to be tit and able to carry guns of the same calibre as steam 
vessels of similar power in Her Majesty's service and also a good substantial and 
efficient sailing vessel to be built of wood of at least 100 tons burthen All such 
steam and sailing vessels always to be supplied and furnished with all necessary and 
proper apparel furniture lightning conductors on Snow Harris’s principle stores 
charts chronometers proper nautical instruments tackle boats fuel oil tallow pro¬ 
visions anchors cables fire pumps and other proper means for extinguishing fire and 
whatsoever else may be requisite and necessary for equipping the said vessels and 
rendering them constantly efficient for the service hereby contracted to be performed 
and also manned with competent officers of whom all Commanders and First and Sec¬ 
ond Officers if not Officers of Her Majesty’s Navy shall have undergone or on arriving 
in England shall undergo an examination and produce certificates of fitness for their 
respective situations from the Board of Examiners appointed or which may be ap¬ 
pointed by Act of Parliament or Order in Council, for the examination of Masters and 
Mates in the Merchant Service and a sufficient crew of able seamen and other men 
and all the said steam vessels to be likewise manned and supplied with competent 
and efficient engineers machinery and engines and to be in all respects as to ves¬ 
sels engines equipments engineers officers and crew subject in the first instance 
and from time to time and at all times afterwards to the approval of the said Com¬ 
missioners and of such persons as shall at anytime or from time to time have author¬ 
ity under the said Commissioners to inspect and examine the same And no vessel 
with engines of less than 400 horse power shall under any circumstance whatsover 
except by special permission of the said Commissioners be employed in any voyage 
under this contract on the Atlantic service either out or home and that whenever 
necessary or whenever required by the said Commissioners one or more of the said 
ten vessels with engines of not less than 400 horse power shall be employed inter- 
colonially in addition to the said four vessels with engiins of not less than 250 horse 
power And that the said company shall in every case of the said steam vessels or 


118 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


sailing vessels or any of them becoming disabled immediately at their own cost and 
charge replace the same by good and efficient vessels of similar tonnage or horse 
power obtained by hire or otherwise 

That the said Company shall and will during the continuance of this contract in 
every case diligently faithfully and to the satisfaction of the said commissioners 
and with all possible speed convey the said mails on board the said vessels respect¬ 
ively as mentioned in the tables of routes (numbered 1 to 8 inclusive hereunto an¬ 
nexed 

As the intervals of time in which the different vessels will perform the passages 
stated in the Plan of Routes as also the stoppages made at each of the mentioned 
places from unforeseen causes may differ from those respectively assigned to them 
by estimation yet the intervals mentioned therein both of passages and stoppages 
shall be considered as those to be adhered to under ordinary circumstances 

Although no alteration can be made in the routes without permission of Her Majes¬ 
ty’s Government still the Company’s Superintendents abroad are authorized to change 
the vessels where required 

If on arrival of the Outward Mails at the appointed rendezvous abroad there should 
be no branch vessel in attendance to receive them the Company’s Superintendents for 
the time being shall engage any vessel that can be conveniently hired to carry for¬ 
ward the Branch Mails on those occasions provided that by such means the Mails 
would reach their destination sooner than if retained for conveyance by the Com¬ 
pany’s Branch Vessels next to arrive 

That notwithstanding anything which may be herein stated the said vessels which 
shall leave this kingdom in performance of this Contract shall if the said Commis¬ 
sioners at auy time or times think tit leave any port or place whatever in Great 
Britain or Ireland on such days of the month at equal intervals of days and at such 
hour with the Mails on board as the said Commissioners shall at any time or from time 
to time appoint by writing under the band of the Secretary of the Admiralty and in 
every case the Vessels shall put to sea as soon as the said Mails are on board and the 
Home Mails shall be delivered at the same port in Great Britain or Ireland as the 
Vessel is for the time being to leave Great Britain or Ireland in performance of this 
Contract and in case of Southampton not being the port of departure the place of 
departure for the time being shall be considered as the place substituted for South¬ 
ampton in the Tables hereinbefore mentioned or referred to 

That at each of the places and ports at which any of the said Vessels whether Steam 
or Sailing Vessels are or may be appointed to call or proceed in the performance of 
this Contract and where no time is hereby specifically tixed for their stay they shall 
remain so long only as shall be required for landing and embarking the Mails leaving 
the precise stay of the said Vessels at such places to be determined by the said Com¬ 
missioners and with power to the said Commissioners also when so determined to 
alter the same from time to time in such manner as in their judgment will afford the 
greatest accommodation to the different places and ports consistently with ensuring 
the due arrival and departure of the said several Vessels with the Mails at and from 
the ultimate places of their destination at the proper times 

And the said Company shall and will at the expira tion of three calendar months’ 
notice in writing under the hand of the Secretary of the Admiralty alter and from 
time to time vary the periods of the stay of the said Vessels at all or any of the re¬ 
spective places in the Tables of Routes hereinbefore mentioned or referred to or to 
which they may have to proceed in the performance of this Contract and the times of 
their arrival and departure according to the directions which the said Company may 
at any time or from time to time receive from the said Commissioners as aforesaid 

That the said Company aiso shall and will at the expiration of three calendar months’ 
notice in writing under the hand of the Secretary of the Admiralty alter and from time 
to t ime vary the route of a ll or of any of the Steam and Sailing Vessels employed in the 
performance of this Contract in the North and South Atlantic Oceans between the lat¬ 
itudes of 27- N. and 57° S. and ‘20° and 97° 5*2' West longitude according to such .di¬ 
rections as they shall so receive by any such notice but the Steam Vessels of the said 
• Company shall not be required to travel annually a greater distance in the aggre¬ 
gate than live hundred and forty-seven thousand two hundred and ninety-six nau¬ 
tical miles 

That the Steam Vessels of the said Company shall and will travel in the Atlantic 
Ocean between the latitudes of 27° N. and 37°* S. and 20° and 97° 52' West longitude 
any number of nautical miles annually which may be required under notice as afore¬ 
said, in addition to the live hundred and forty-seven thousand two hundred ami ninety- 
six nautical miles and the said Company shall be paid by the said Commissioners for 
such increased amount of mileage at the rate of nine shillings and ten-pence per nau¬ 
tical mile in addition to the payment of two hundred and seventy thousand pounds 
per annum hereafter stipulated to be made to the said Company for the ordinary per¬ 
formance of this Contract 

That if at any time or times owing to stress of weather or any other unavoidable 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTEkESTS. 


119 


■cireumstnncc any vessel employed in the performance of this Contract shall not be able"* 
in tile <>pinion ot the Officer or person having charge of Her Majesty’s said Mails to 
reach in due course any ot the places to which she ought to proceed the same Officer or 
person may and shall give such directions and make such alterations for the particular 
case as shall seem most expedient to him for the performance of the service and any 
directions or orders which he may give in such cases sha'l be strictly obeyed by the 
Master ot every such vessel who shall insert such alterations and the reason thereof 
in his Log-Book which shall whenever required be produced to the said Commission¬ 
ers or to the Governor of any British Colony or to Her Majesty’s Consul at any for- 
eign port or place and no extra milt-age shall be paid for any such alteration in the 
routes 

that the said Company shall and will from time to time and at .all times during 
the continuance of this Contract make such alterations or improvements in the con¬ 
struction equipments and machinery of the Vessels which shall be used in the per¬ 
formance ot this Contract as the advanced state of science may suggest and the said 
Commissioners may direct 

That the said Company shall receive and allow to remain on board each of the said 
•Steam Vessels so to be employed in the performance of this Contract an Officer in Her 
Majesty’s Navy or any other person to be appointed by the said Commissioners to 
take charge of the said Mails and also a servant of the said Officer or otlmr person as 
aforesaid if required and that every such officer or other person shall be recognized 
and considered by the said Company an 1 their Officers Agents and Seamen as the Agent 
of the said Commissioners in charge of the said Mails and as having full authority 
in all cases to require a due and strict execution of this Contract on the part of the 
said Company their Officers Servants and Agents and to determine every question 
whenever arising relative to proceeding to sea or putting into harbor or to the ne¬ 
cessity of stopping to assist any vessel in distress or to save human life and that the 
decision of such Officer or other person as aforesaid shall in each and every of such 
cases be final and binding on the said Company unless the said Commissioners on ap¬ 
peal by the said Company shall think proper to decide otherwise 

That a suitable first-rate Cab n with appropriate bed bedding and furniture shall 
at the cost of the said Company be provided and appropriated by them for and to 
the exclusive use and for the sole accommodation of every such Naval Officer or other 
person authorized as aforesaid and also a proper and convenient place of deposit on 
board with secure lock and key for the Mails and that each and every of the said 
Officers or other persons as aforesaid shall be victualled by the said Company as every 
Officer to be conveyed under this Contract as a Chief Cabin Passenger is to be vict¬ 
ualled without any charge being made either for his passage or victualling And 
that should all or any of such Officers or other persons require a servant such servant 
and also any person appointed to take charge of the Mails on board the said Sailing 
Vessel shall be also provided with a proper and suitable berth and be duly victualled 
by and at the cost of the said Company without any charge being made for the same 
And that if the said Commissioners shall at any time during the continuance of this 
Contract think fit to entrust the charge and custody of the Mails to the master of 
any of the Vessels to be employed in the performance of this Contract or if the 
Officer or other person appointed to have charge of the Mails shall from illness or any 
unforeseen accident be unable to proceed on the voyage and no other Officer or per¬ 
son be sent on board by the said Commissioners or any of their Agents in his stead in 
any of such cases the Master shall without any charge to the public take due care 
of and be responsible for the receipt safe custody and delivery of the said Mails 
and shall make the usual declaration or declarations required or which may be re¬ 
quired by Her Majesty’s Postmaster-General in such and similar cases and every such 
Master having the charge of such Mails shall himself immediately on the arrival at 
any of the said ports or places of any Vessel so conveying the same deliver the said 
Mails into the hands of the Postmaster of the port or place where such Mails are to 
be delivered or into the hands of such other person as the said Commissioners shall 
direct and authorize to receive the same receiving in like manner all the return Mails 
to be forwarded in due course 

That at each port or place where the said Mails are to be delivered and received 
the Naval Officer or such other person to be appointed as aforesaid shall whenever 
and as often as by him deemed practicable or necessary be conveyed on shore and 
also from the shore to the vessel employed for the time being in the peformance of 
this Contract together with or (if such Officer or person considers requisite) without 
the said Mails in a suitable boat with not less than four oars to be provided and prop¬ 
erly manned and equipped by the said Company and that the directions of the Naval 
Officer or other person as aforesaid shall in all cases be obeyed as to the mode time 
and place of receiving and delivering the said Mails 

That if any Vessel employed in the performance of this Contract having the Mails 
on board shall stop linger or deviate from the direct course on her voyage (except 
from stress of weather or other unavoidable circumstances or when authorized as 


120 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


aforesaid) or shall delay starting at the appointed time or shall put hack into port 
after starting without the sanction in each and every case of the Officer or other per¬ 
son authorized to have the charge of the said Mails or when so sanctioned to put 
back into port shall not again start and proceed diiect in performance of the service 
hereby contracted for when and so soon as required by the said Officer or other per-^ 
son authorized to have the charge of the said Mails then and in each and every of 
such cases and as often as the same shall happen the said Company shall and vm 
forfeit and pay unto Her Majesty Her heirs and successors the sum of one hundred 
pounds And that if any Vessel which ought to leave the place which may be ap¬ 
pointed for her departure from England in the performance of this Contract shall not 
proceed direct on her voyage for twelve hours after the proper and appointed time 
(except as aforesaid) the said Company shall and will so often as any such omission^ 
shall happen forfeit and pay unto Her Majesty her heirs and successors the sum ol 
five hundred pounds and also the further sum of five hundred pounds for every suc¬ 
cessive period of twelve hours which shall elapse until such Vessel shall proceed di¬ 
rect on her voyage in the performance of this Contract 

And that if any Vessel which ought to leave any other port or place in performance 
of this Contract shall not proceed direct on her voyage for twelve hours after the 
proper and appointed time (except as aforesaid) the said Company shall and will so 
often as any such omission may occur forfeit and pay unto Her Majesty her heirs 
and successors the sum of two hundred pounds and also the further sum of two hun¬ 
dred pounds for every successive period of twelve hours which shall elapse until such, 
vessel shall proceed direct on her voyage in the performance of this Contract 

That every Naval Officer or other person authorized to have the charge of the said 
Mails shall either alone or with such other persons as he may consider necessary have 
full power and authority as often as he may deem it requisite to examine and sur¬ 
vey, in such manner and with the assistance of such persons as he may think proper 
any of the Vessels employed or to be employed in the peiformauce of this Contract 
and the hulls machinery and equipments thereof on his giving notice to the Master 
for the time being of the Vessel about to be examined of such his intention and it 
any defect or deficiency be ascertained and notice thereof be given to such Master 
the said Master shall immediately or as soon as possible thereupon remedy replace 
or effectively repair or make good or cause to be remedied replaced or effectively 
repaired and made good every such defect or deficiency 

And that the said Commissioners shall also have full power whenever and as often 
as they may deem it requisite to survey by any other of their Officers or Agents ait 
and every the Vessels employed and to be employed in the performance of this Con¬ 
tract and the hulls thereof and the engines machinery furniture tackle apparel stores 
and equipment of every such Vessels and if any such Vessel or any part thereof 
or any engines machinery furniture tackle apparel boats stores or equipments shall 
on any such survey be declared by any of such Officers or Agents unseaworthy or 
not adapted lo the service hereby contracted to be performed or if such Officers or 
Agents shall deem it necessary or expedient that any alteration or improvement shall 
be made therein or any part thereof in order to keep pace with the more advanced 
state of science every Vessel which shall be disapproved of or in which such defi¬ 
ciency defect or want of improvement shall appear shall be deemed inefficient for 
any service hereby contracted to be performed and shall not be employed again in 
the conveyance of the Mai's from England until such defect or deficiency shall have 
been repaired or supplied or the alterations or improvements as the case may be 
shall have been made to the satisfaction of the said Commissioners 

That the said Company and all Commanding and other Officers of the Vessels to be 
employed in the performance of this Contract and all Agents Seamen and Servants of 
the said Company shall at all times during the continuance of this Contract puuci ually 
attend to the orders and directions of the said Commissioners or of any of their Officers 
or Agents as to the landing delivering and receiving the Mails And it is hereby 
agreed by and between the parties hereto t at all and every the sums of money hereby 
stipulated to be forfeited and paid by the said Company unto Her Majesty lieiis and 
successors sball be considered as stipulated or ascertained damages and shall and may 
be deducted and retained by the said Commissioners out of any monies payable or which 
may thereafter be payable to the said Company or the payment may be enforced with 
full costs of suit at the discretion of the Commissioners 

That the said Company shall and will when and as often as in writing they or the 
masters of their respective Vessels shall be required so to do by the said Commission¬ 
ers or by such Naval or other Officers or agents acting under their authority (such 
writing to specify the rank or description of the person or persons to be conveyed 
and the accommodation to be provided for him or them) receive provide for victual 
and convey on board each and every or any of the Vessels to be employed in the per¬ 
formance of this Contract (in addition to the Naval Officer or other person authorized 
to have the charge of the said Mails) any Officers in the Navy Army or Civil Service of 
Her Majesty not exceeding four in any one ship as Chief Cabin passengers with their 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


121 


■wives and families and any persons not exceeding four in any one ship as Fore-Cabin 
passengers with their wives and families together with the servants of both Chief and 
f ore-Cabin passengers and any number of Seamen Marines Soldiers or Artificers not 
exceeding ten in any one ship with their wives and families as Deck passengers to be 
always provided with adequate protection from rain sun and bad weather and not 
exposed on deck without such competent shelter and to be exclusive of any men to 
be sent home under the provisions of the Act 11 Geo IV. c. 20 

'1 hat Commissioned Officers their wives and families be considered as Chief-Cabin 
passengers Non-commissioned Officers their wives and families as Fore-Cabin passen¬ 
gers and Seamen Marines Private Soldiers Artificers and their wives and families as 
Deck passengers and the said servants (in respect of accommodation) as the servants 
of Chief-Cabin passengers. 

1 hat each Field Officer and every Naval Officer of equal or superior rank shall be 
allowed ninety cubic feet of space in measurement for baggage provided (except in the 
case of Royal Engineers) such allowance shall not exceed eighteen hundred weight in 
weight and all other Officers in Her Majesty's Naval and Military Service and Officers 
in the Civil Service sixty cubic feet each provided (except in the case of the Royal 
Engineers) such allowance shall not exceed twelve hundred weight in weight 

That the Royal Engineers shall be allowed the same measurement but to extend in 
weight to twenty-seven hundred weight for a Field Officer and eighteen lmudr.ed weight 
for every other Officer of the Royal Engineers. 

That Soldiers of the Royal Artillery and Sappers and Miners and their wives shall 
be allowed six cubic feet each for baggage and all married Officers when accompanied 
by their wives or families a further allowance not exceeding one-half of that before 
mentioned according to their rank and corps 

That for every company of the Royal Artillery embarked there shall be conveyed 
free of all charge the proper proportion of light field pieces if required and that any 
hammocks and bedding which may be sent out for the use of the troops or other per¬ 
sons embarked shall be placed in charge of the Officer authorized to have charge of 
Her Majesty’s Mails and be brought back to England if required free of auv charge 
for freight 

That the victualling of Officers their wives and families conveyed as Chief Cabin 
passengers shall be the same as is usually allowed by the said Company to Chief-Cabin 
passengers their wives and families the victualling of Non-commissioned Officers 
their wives and families conveyed as Fore Cabin passengers shall be the same as is al¬ 
lowed to the Boatswain and Carpenter of the said Company’s Steam Ships and the vic¬ 
tualling of Seamen Marines Soldiers and Artificers their wives and families con¬ 
veyed as Deck Passengers shall be the same as is allowed to the seamen of the said 
Company’s Steam Ships and the victualling of the servants of Officers whether Chief 
or Fore Cabin passengers shall be the same as the servants of other Chief and Fore 
Cabin passengers 

That the passage money shall be paid (in full of all charges for mess including a 
pint of port or good foreign white wine and one bottle of malt liquor per day) for each 
Officer conveyed as a Chief Cabin Passenger and one gill of spirits for each Non-com¬ 
missioned Officer Seaman Marine Soldier Artificer and Servant conveyed as a Fore 
Cabin or Deck passenger at and after the rates of passage mentioned in the Tables of 
Rates of Passage (numbered 1 to 4 inclusive) hereunto annexed the rate of passage 
for the men who may be sent home by virtue of the 11 Geo IV c. 20 being paid for 
in accordance with the provisions of that Act and that the Passage Money for the 
families and wives of such Officers shall be paid to the said Companys Captain’s by 
the Officers themselves at rates never exceeding those contained in the said Tables 
hereunto annexed 

That whenever the said Company shall convey any soldiers as Deck Passengers other 
than those specifically provided for by this Contract the said Company shall provide 
them with adequate protection from rain sun aud bad weather and they shall not be 
exposed on deck without such competent shelter 

And that the said Company shall and will receive on board each and every of the 
said Vessels employed in the performance of this Contract any number of small pack¬ 
ages containing astronomical instruments charts wearing apparel medicines or 
other articles and convey and deliver the same to from and betw een all or any of the 
said ports or places to or from which the said Mails are to be conveyed in the per¬ 
formance of this Contract when and as often as directed by the said Commissioners or 
their Secretary or Agents duly authorized free from all costs and charges and also 
shall aud will receive on board each and every of the said Vessels and convey and 
deliver to from and betw een all or any of the same ports or places any naval or other 
stores not exceeding five tons in weight at any onetime in any one Vessel at the rate 
of freight charged for the time being by the said Company for private goods but the 
rate payable by Her Majesty shall never exceed five pounds per ton on receiving from 
the said Commissioners or any of their Officers or Agents two days’ previous notice 
of its being their attention to have such stores so conveyed 


122 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


And the said Commissioners in consideration of the premises and of the said Com¬ 
pany their Officers Servants and Agents strictly and punctually performing the 
whole of the said service hereby contracted to be performed and observing and keep¬ 
ing the covenants and agreements hereby entered into by them do for and on behalf of 
Her Majest < \|Her Heirs and successors promise and agree that they the said Commis¬ 
sioners on behalf of Her Majesty will for the time the whole of the said service shall 
have been strictly performed pay or cause to be paid to the said Company by bills 
at sight payable by Her Majestys Paymaster General a sum after the rate of Two 
Hundred and Seventy Thousand Pounds per annum by equal quarterly payments and 
with a proportionate part thereof should this Contract terminate ou any other day 
than the day of quarterly payment such payments to be subject however to the 
abatement of any deductions or forfeitures which the said Company may have incur¬ 
red as herein provided and the first of such payments to be made on the Thirty-first 
day of March One Thousand Eight hundred and Fifty-one 

And it is hereby agreed that in the event of the said Vessels being ordered by the 
said Commissioners to leave any port or place in Great Britain or Ireland instead of 
Southampton in performance of this Contract the said Company shall be entitled to 
receive compensation for the additional expense which they shall necessarily be com¬ 
pelled by such order to incur and for the diminution of receipts which shall be oc¬ 
casioned thereby and in case the said Commissioners aud the said Company shall not 
agree as to the amount of compensation that is due to the latter the matter shall be 
referred to two Arbitrators one to be chosen by the said Commissioners and the other 
by the said Company and in case of a difference of opinion between such Arbitrators 
to an Umpire to be chosen by such Arbitrators before they proceed in their reference 
and the joint and concurrent award of the said Arbitrators or the separate award 
of the said Umpire when the said Arbitrators caunot agree shall be final and con¬ 
clusive t 

And it is hereby agreed that if at any time and so long as the said Company shall 
make it appear to the satisfaction of the Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury 
for the time being (but not otherwise) that from any change in the relations between 
this kingdom and any foreign countries or from war or other causes distinctly of a 
public and national character to be judged of by the same Commissioners the rate of 
insurance for Steam Vessels and the freight payable by the said Company for coals 
which may be sent out from the United Kingdom to be used in the performance of 
this Contract and the rate of insurance on such coals shall have been raised above the 
averages hereinafter mentioned that is to say six pounds and six shillings per cent, 
per annum ou such Steam Vessels as aforesaid one pound two shillings and sixpence 
per ton for the freight of coals and two pounds and two shillings per cent, for the 
insurance thereon the said Company shall be paid an additional yearly sum of money 
according to the increase above the said specified averages but the said additional 
sum of money for freight shall be paid in respect of seventy-five thousand tons per 
annum and no more and the yearly amount of any additional sum of money to be 
paid as aforesaid in any case or under any circumstances either for insurance and 
freight or otherwise shall not exceed Seventy-five Thousand Pounds per annum 

And it is hereby further agreed that if after the said Commissioners of the Treasury 
shall have decided that some additional sum of money should be paid to the said 
Company in consequence of any such increase in the said rates of insurance and 
freight any difference should arise as to the amount so to be paid such difference shall 
be referred to two Arbitrators one to be chosen from time to time by the said Com¬ 
missioners of the Treasury and the other by the said Company and if such Arbitra¬ 
tors should at any time or times not agree in the matter or question referred to them 
then such question in difference shall be refeired by them to an Umpire to be chosen 
by such Arbitrators before they proceed with the reference to them and the joint aud 
concurrent award of the said Arbitrators or the separate award of the said Umpire 
when the said Arbitrators cannot agree shall be binding and conclusive upon all 
parties 

And it is hereby further agreed that if an entire stoppage of any part of the service 
hereby contracted to be performed shall occur by reason of any change in the rela¬ 
tions between this kingdom and foreign countries or by reason of war or other causes 
distinctly of a public and national character the said Commissioners of the Treasury 
shall have power to make such alterations in the course aud services of all or any of 
the Vessels employed in the performance of this Contract even beyond the limits of 
the several ports or places to which the said Mails are hereby agreed to be conveyed 
as they the same Commissioners may deem most advantageous to the Public 

Provided that for the effecting any such alterations it shall not be necessary for 
the said Company to employ any greater number of such Steam or Sailing Vessels as 
aforesaid than they are hereby bound to employ in duly performing the whole of the 
said service hereby specifically contracted to be performed and that the Steam Vessels 
of the said Company shall not be required to travel annually a greater distance in the 
aggregate than live hundred and forty-seven thousand two humued and ninety-six 


AMERICAN SHIRRING INTERESTS. 


123 


nautical miles unless specially required so to do by the said Commissioners and in 
which case payment is to be made for any additional amount of miles as extra mile¬ 
age at the rate of nine shillings and teupence per nautical mile and in case the same 
Commissioners shall consider that any such alterations cannot be satisfactorily made 
and the said Company can perform the remainder of the said service with a less num¬ 
ber ot Vessels than is required to be employed by them while performing the whole of 
the said service then and so long as such may be the case there shall be a reasonable 
annual deduction made from the money hereby agreed to be paid to them or such 
other arrangement made by the same Commissioners as they the same Commissioners 
may consider fair and just between the Company and the Public 

And it is hereby agreed that the said Commissioners for executing the Office of Lord 
High Admiral shall at any time during the continuance of this Contract have power 
and be at liberty to purchase all or any of the said Vessels at a valuation or to charter 
the same exclusively for Her Majesty’s service at a rate of hire to be mutually fixed 
and agreed on by them and the Company but if any difference should at any time or 
times arise as to the amount of valuation or hire so to be paid or as to the amount of 
damages consequent upon such purchase or hiring such difference shall be referred to 
two arbitrators one to be chosen from time to time by the said Commissioners and 
the other by the Company and if such Arbitrators should at any time or times not 
agree in the matter or question referred to them then such question in difference 
shall be referred by them to an Empire to be chosen by such Arbitrators before they 
proceed with the reference to them and the joint and concurrent award of the said 
Arbitrators or the separate award of the said Umpire when the said Arbitrators cannot 
agree shall be binding and conclusive upon all parties and that the same Commis¬ 
sioners in the case of hiring any such Vessel shall return the same to the Company in 
the same state and condition as she was in at the time of any such hiring reasonable 
wear and tear excepted and if any difference should arise upon that point the same 
shall be settled in the same manner as the amount for the hiring is to be settled in 
case of difference 

And if is further agreed that in case of such purchase or hire the service hereby 
contracted to be performed shall be performed by other Vessels of the Company of a 
similar description to the Vessel or Vessels purchased or hired if they can in due and 
proper time furnish them such other Vessels as lo construction machinery, equip¬ 
ment and crew to be subject to the same approval as other Vessels employed under 
this contract 

And in the event of the Company being allowed by the said Commissioners to con¬ 
tinue to perform only a portion of the service there shall be paid to the Company 
such annual sum of money as shall be agreed upon by the said Commissioners and 
the Company and in case of their differing as to the amount the difference to be set¬ 
tled by two Arbitrators or an Umpire to be chosen respectively as aforesaid 

Aud it is agreed that any submission which may be made to arbitration in pursu¬ 
ance of this Contract shall be made a Rule of Her Majesty’s Court of Exchequer pursu¬ 
ant to the Statute in that case made and provided and that any witnesses examined 
upon any reference may be examined upon oath. 

And it is hereby agreed and declared that this Contract shall commence on the first 
day of January One thousand Eight hundred and Fifty-one and shall continue in 
force for eleven years and then determine if the said Commissioners shall by writing 
under the hand of the Secretary of the Admiralty for the time being have given to 
the said Company or the said Company shall have given to the said Commissioners 
twelve calendar mouths’ notice in writing that this Contract shall so determine but if 
neither the said Commissioners nor the said Company shall give any such notice this 
■contract shall continue in force even after the said term of eleven years until the 
expiration of a twelve calendar months’ notice in writing as aforesaid shall be given 
at any period of the year by either of the parties hereto to the other of them 

And it is hereby further agreed and provided that the said Company shall not as¬ 
sign underlet or dispose of this Contract or any part thereof and that in case of the 
■same or any part thereof being assigned underlet or otherwise disposed of or of any 
breach of this Contract on the part of the* said Company their Officers Agents Or ser¬ 
vants it shall be lawful for the said Commissioners for executing the said Office of 
Lord High Admiral (if they think fit and notwithstanding there may or may not have 
been any former breach of this Contract) by writing under the hand of their Secre¬ 
tary for the time being to determine this Contract without any previous notice to the 
said Company or their Agents nor shall the said Company be entitled to any compen¬ 
sation in consequence of such determination but even it this Contract be so deter¬ 
mined the payment of the sum of money hereinafter agreed to be made shall be en¬ 
forced should the same be not duly paid by the said Company 

And it is also agreed that the notices or directions which the Commissioners for ex¬ 
ecuting the Office of Lord High Admiral or their Secretary Officers or other persons are 
hereby authorized and empowered to give to the said Company their Officers Servants 
or Agents may at the option of such Commissioners or of their Secretary Officers or 


124 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


other persons be either delivered to tlie Master of the Vessel or other Officer Agent or 
Servant of the said Company in the charge or management of any Vessel employed in 
the performance of this Contractor may be left for the said Company at their office or 
house of business in London 

And it is hereby agreed that the Contract bearing date on or about the first day of 
July One Thousand Eight Hundred and Forty-six and made between the Commission- 
ins for executing the Office of Lord High Admiral on behalf of Her Majesty of the one- 
part and the said Company of the other part shall be deemed and be considered to 
remain in force until the said first day of January One Thousand Eight Hundred and 
Fifty-one from and after which day the same is hereby terminated and annulled 

And lastly for the due and faithful performance of all and singular the covenants 
conditions provisoes clauses articles and agreements hereinbefore contained which 
on the part and behalf of the said Company are or ought to be observed performed 
fulfilled and kept The said company do hereby bind themselves and their succes¬ 
sors unto our Sovereign Lady the Queen in the sum of Fifty Thousand Pounds of law¬ 
ful money of the United Kingdom to be paid to our said Lady the Queen her heirs 
and successors by way of stipulated or ascertained damages hereby agreed upon be¬ 
tween the same Commissioners and the said < 'ompany in case of the failure on the part 
of the said Company in the due execution of this Contract or any part thereof 

In witness whereof two of the said Commissioners for executing the Office ot Lord 
High Admiral have hereunto set their hands and seals and the said “ Royal Mail 
Steam Packet Company ” have hereunto set their corporate seal the day and year first 
above written 

ALEXANDER MILNE, [l. s.] 
WILLIAM COW PER, [l. s.] 

Signed sealed and delivered by the said Commissioners in the presence of— 

John James. 

The corporate seal of the above-named “ Royal Mail Steam Packet Company,” was 
hereunto affixed by order of the Court of Directors in the presence of— 

[L. s.] E. CHAPPELL 

Secretary 
John James 

Admiralty 

Tables of Routes for the Packets of the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company , commencing from 

Southampton, January , 1851. 

[Mentioned and referred to in the Contract hereunto annexed, and numbered 1 to 8 inclusive.] 


OBSERVATIONS. 

The periods fixed for departing from the several termini, as stated in theTables and 
Remarks, must be rigidly adhered to; and if, on the return voyages, the steamers 
should fail to accomplish the speed estimated, the time so lost must be retrieved, if 
possible, by curtailing subsequent stoppages. 

To compensate, in some measure, for the irregularities occasioned by the short 
month of February, the vessels which are to meet at St. Thomas the Out-ship of the 
2d March, will, upon that occasion in each year, leave the respective termini one day 
earlier than specified in the Tables. 

This remark will apply also to the No. V. steamer. 

When the several steamers assembled at St. Thomas shall have coaled, exchanged 
mails, and completed all the necessary transfers, &c., they are to proceed to their re¬ 
spective destinations without further delay, although the time of stoppage, stated in 
the Tables, should not have expired, it being most important that the delivery of Her 
Majesty’s mails should be expedited as much as possible. 

Although no alterations can be made in the Routes without permission of Her Ma¬ 
jesty’s Government (except in urgent cases of accident to auy of the ships), still the 
Company’s superintendents abroad are authorized to change the vessels when they 
deem it necessary. 


i 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


125 


Table No. I .—The Atlantic and Chagres route. 
TWICE A MONTH. 


Dates. 

Places. 

Distances in miles. 

Speed per hour. 

Steam¬ 

ing. 

S t o p- 
pages. 

Coals. 

From 

South¬ 

ampton. 

Arrival. 

Departure. 

[ 

•s^c[ 

Hours 

Days. 

Hours. 

Days. 

Hours. 


2 and 17, 6 p. m 

From Southampton 







Coal. 



19 and 4, noon .. 

21 and 6, 5 a. m 

To St. Thomas. 

3, 622 

9 

16 

18 

1 

17 

Coal. 

16 

18 

24 and 9, 10 a. m 

24 and 9,4p.m. 

“ Santa Martha.. 

690 

9 

3 

5 


6 


21 

16 

25 and 10, 4a.m. 

25 and 10,10 a. m. 

“ Carthagena .... 

105 

9 


12 

.... 

6 


22 

10 

26 and 11, 5 p. m 

28 and 13, 6 a. m. 

“ Chagres. 

280 

l 9 

IT 

7 

i 

13 


23 

23 

29 and 14, 9a.m. 

3 and 18, noon . 

“ GREY TOWN. 

240 

9 

| i 

3 

4 

3 


26 

15 

4 and 19, 3 p. m. 

11 and 26, 1 a. m. 

‘ 1 Chagres. 

240 

! 9 

i 

3 

6 

10 


31 

21 

12 and 27, 8a.m. 

12 and 27, 4 p. m 

“ Carthagena .... 

280 

! 9 

i 

7 

.... 

8 


39 

14 

16 and 1, 8 a.m. 

18 and 3, 6 a. m. 

“ St. Thomas. 

795 

. 9 

3 

16 


22 

Coal . 

43 

14 

4 and 19, mid¬ 












night . 


j “ Southampton... 

3, 622 

9 

16 

18 



Coal. 

62 

6 



9,874 

{ 

45 

1 

17 

16 

13 





Time Out to Chagres .. 
Ditto Home from ditto 
•Course of Post.. 


Days. Hours. 
23 23 

23 23 

62 6 


Remarks on Table No. I. 

This Route will be performed by a steamer leaving Southampton on the 2d and I7th 
of each month. 

On arrival at St. Thomas the out-ship will transfer mails, &c., to the several ves¬ 
sels appointed to receive them. 

After effecting these transfers, receiving the mails, &c., for places to be visited, 
and having sufficiently coaled, this steamer will proceed without loss of time to Santa 
Martha, &c. (according to the Table), taking care on the return voyage to leave Grey 
Town at noon on the 31st day, and Chagres at 1 a. m. on the 39th day, after her de¬ 
parture from Southampton. 

To accelerate the home mails, the ship on her return will omit calling at Santa 
Martha. 

On reaching St. Thomas the requisite exchanges of mails will again take place; and 
the steamer, after coaling complete, will immediately proceed to Southampton. 

In the event of either of the steamers on Routes 2, 3, and 4 not reaching St. Thomas 
within the estimated time, the homeward No. 1 steamer is to await the arrival of the 
missing vessel seven clear days, if necessary, after the appointed hour for her depart¬ 
ure on the homeward voyage. 

The mails for Tortola are to be delivered to the Company’s Superintendent at St. 
Thomas, who will be held responsible for their immediate transmission and for the 
due embarkation of the return mails. 


























































126 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Table No. II .—The Jamaica and Mexican route. 


ONCE A MONTH. 


Arrival. 


20th, lp.m 
23d, 3p.m. 
29th, 10 a. m 
30th,5 p.m 
5th, 6p. m 
13th, 10 a. m 
16tli, 4 p. m 
yi th, 1 a. m 


Dates. 

Places. 

Distances in miles. 

i 

Speed per hour. 

Steam¬ 

ing. 

Stop¬ 

pages. 

Coals. 

Feu. 

> outh- 
ampton 


Departure. 

Days. 

Hours. 

>■. 

c3 

P 

Hours. 

00 

eS 

P 

Hours. 


90th 6 a. tii 

From St. Thomas .. 






Coal . 

17 

12 


90t,h 3pm 

To Porto Rico .... 

65 

9 

I r* 


2 


17 

19 


24 th 6 a,, m . 

“ Jamaica . 

643 

9 

3 L... 


15 

Coal . 

20 

21 


99th fi p. m _ _ 

“ VeraCruz . 

1, 118 

9 

5 4 


8 


26 

16 


4th 7 a,, m . 

“ TAMPICO ... 

' 205 

9 

... 23 

3 

14 


27 

23 


8th fi a. m _ 

“ Vera Cruz . . 

205 

9 

.... 1 23 

3 



32 

12 


13th 4 p. m .. 

“ Jamaica . 

1,118 

9 

5 1 4 


6 

Coal . 

40 

16 


1 fith fi p. m _ 

“ Porto Rico .... 

643 

9 

3 1.... 


2 


43 

22 



“ St. Thomas _ 

65 

9 

....) 7 

3 

5 

Coal . 

44 

7 




4, 062 

.... 

18 20 

11 

4 


H"*; 


Days. Hours. 


Time out to Vera Cruz. 26 16 

Ditto Home from ditto. 26 18 

Course of Post. 62 6 


Remarks on Table No. II. . 

This No. II. steamer having received at St. Thomas from the Out, Home, and Inter¬ 
colonial vessels, all mails, &c.,for places enumerated in the Table, will proceed to de¬ 
liver them as therein laid down, taking care on the return voyage to leave Tampico 
at 7 a. m. on the 32d day after the Out-mails were dispatched from Southampton. 

Should the weather, however, at any time prevent the shipment of mails, &c. 
within the time of stoppage allowed, the vessel may be detained off Tampico an ad¬ 
ditional 24 or even 36 hours; but iu such cases the stay at Vera Cruz must be cur¬ 
tailed in proportion, that the ship may leave that place precisely at the hour specified 
in the table. 

Ou returning to St. Thomas, this steamer will deliver the Home and Intercolonial 
Mails, &.c. to the vessel appointed to receive them, and prepare as expeditiously as 
possible to resume the service on this route as before. 


Table No. III .—The Jamaica and Havana route. 
ONCE A MONTH. 




Dates. 



Arrival. 

Departure. 


5, 6 a. m .... 

5, 1 p. m- 

5, 3 p. m. 

7,10 a. m- 

7, noon. 

8, 5 p. m- 

9, 6 a. m. 

12, 4 p. m- 

13, 8 a. m. 

15, 4 p. m- 

20, 4 p. m. 

23, 4 a. m- 

24, 8 a. m. 

27, 6 p. m- 

28, 1 p. m. 

29, 6 p. m- 

29, 8 p. m_ 

1, 3 p. in- 

1, 5 p. m. 

1 midnight, 

. 




Places. 

Distances in miles. 

Speed per hour. 

Steam¬ 

ing. 

Stop¬ 

pages. 

Coals. 

From 

South¬ 

ampton. 

Days. 

Hours. 

Days. 

Hours. 

Days. 

Hours. 

From St. Thomas. 







Coal 

17 


To Porto Rico. 

65 

9 


7 

.... 

2 


17 

19 

“ Jacmel. 

388 

9 

1 

19 


2 


19 

1ft 

‘ 1 Jamaica ... 

255 

9 

1 

5 


13 

Coal.. 

20 

23 

“ Havana. 

740 

9 

3 

10 


16 


°4 

22 

“ HONDURAS. 

500 

9 

2 

8 

5 


27 

‘>2 

“ Havana. 

500 

8 

2 

12 

1 

4 



10 

“ Jamaica. 

740 

9 

3 

10 


19 

Coal .. 

40 

“ Jacmel. 

255 

9 

- l 

5 


2 


4‘2 


“ Porto Rico. 

388 

9 

1 

19 


2 


43 

2i 

“ St. Thomas. 

65 

9 


7 

3 

6 

Coal.. 

44 

6 


3, 896 


18 

6 

11 

18 




Days. Hours. 
- 24 22 

. 25 16 

. 62 6 


Time Out to Havana. 
Ditto Home from ditto 
Course of Post. 



















































































































































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


127 


Remarks on Table No. III. 

This No. III. Steamer having received at St. Thomas from the Out, Home and In 
tecolonial Vessels, all Mails, &c., for places enumerated in the Table, will proceed to 
deliver them as therein laid dovvu, taking care on the return voyage to leave Hon¬ 
duras at 4 p. m. on the 33rd day after the Out-mails were dispatched from Southamp¬ 
ton. 

On returning to St Thomas (which this Steamer must be careful to do by the time 
appointed) she will deliver to the proper Vessels the Home and Intercolonial Mails,. 
&c. and prepare as expeditiously as possible to resume the service on this route as 
before. 


Table No. IV .—Barbadoes and Demerara route. 
TWICE A MONTH. 


• 

Places. 

Distances in miles. 

Speed per hour. 

Steam¬ 

ing. 

Sto p - 
page. 

Coals. 

From 

South¬ 

ampton. 

Days. 

Hours. 

o5 

a 

ft 

Hours. 

CD 

0 

Hours. 

From St. Thomas 







Coal.. 

17 


To St, Kitt’s. 

151 

9 


17 


2 


17 

17 

“ Nevis . 

11 

9 


1 


1 


17 

20 

“ Montserrat.. 

33 

9 


4 


1 


18 

l 

Antigua. 

32 

9 


3 


2 


18 

5 

“ Gruadaloupe.. 

70 

9 


8 


1 


18 

15 

“ Dominique... 

45 

9 


5 

.... 

1 


18 

21 

“ Martinique.. 

40 

9 


4 

.... 

2 


19 

2 

“ St. Lucia. 

45 

9 


5 


1 


19 

9 

41 Barbadoes... 

100 

9 


11 


4 


19 

21 

“DEMERARA 

392 

9 

i 

20 

3 

3 


21 

21 

“ Barbadoes... 

392 

9 

1 

20 


4 


26 

20 

4 * St. Lucia. . 

100 

9 

.... 

11 


1 


27 

11 

“ Martinique.. 

45 

9 


5 


2 


27 

17 

44 Dominique.. 

40 

9 


4 


1 


27 

23 

44 Guadaloupe. 

45 

9 

.... 

5 

.... 

1 


28 

5 

“ Antigua . .. 

70 

9 


8 


2 


28 

14 

4 4 Montserrat.. 

32 

9 


3 


1 


28 

19 

“ Nevis . 

33 

9 


4 


1 


29 


“ St. Kitt’s... - 

11 

9 


1 


2 


29 

2 

“ St. Thomas.. 

151 

9 

.... 

17 

.... 

3 

Coal.. 

29 

21 


1, 838 

.... 

8 

12 

6 

12 

. 




Dates. 


Arrival. 


20 and 
20 and 
20 and 

20 and 

21 and 
21 and 

21 and 

22 and 
22 and 
24 and 

29 and 

30 and 
30 and 
30 and 
30 and 


5, 11 
5, 2 

5, 7 
5,11 

6, 9 

6. 3 

6 , 8 

7, 3 
7, 3 
9, 3 

14, 2 

15. 5 
15, 11 
15, 5 
15, 11 


a. m. 
p. m. 
p. m. 
p. m. 
a. m 
p. m. 
p. in. 
a. ni 
p. in 
p. m. 
p. m. 
a. m. 
a. m 
p. in. 
p. in 


1 and 16, 8 a. m. 
1 and 16, 1 p. in 
1 and 16, 6 p. m 

1 and 16, 8 p. m 

2 and 17, 3 p. iu . 


Departure. 


19 and 

20 and 
20 and 

20 and 

21 and 
21 and 
21 and 


4, 

5, 

5, 

5, 

6 , 


6 p. ni, 
1 p. ni, 
3 p. m 
8 p. m 
1 a. m 
6, 10 a. in 
6, 4 p m 

21 and 6,10 p. m 

22 and 7, 4 a. m 
22 and 7, 

27 and 12, 

29 and 14, 

30 and 15, 

30 and 15, 

30 and 15, 

30 and 15, 

night. 

1 and 16,10 a. m 
land 16, 2p. m 
1 and 16, 7 p. m 
land 16,10 p. m 


7 p.m. 
6 p. m 
6p. m 
6p. m 
1 p. m 
6 p. in 
mid- 



Days. Hours. 


Time Out to Demerara . 21 21 

Ditto Home from ditto. 22 6 

Course of Post. 47 6 


Remarks on Table No. IV. 

This No. IV. Steamer having received at St. Thomas from the Out, Home and Inter¬ 
colonial Vessels, all Mails, &c., for places enumerated in Tables IV. and V., will pro¬ 
ceed to deliver them according to Table No. IV., transferring at Barbadoes, to the No. 
V. Steamer the Mails, &c., for the route on which that vessel is employed. 

This Steamer will leave Demerara on the return voyage at 6 p. m. on the 25th day 
after the Out-mails were dispatched from Southampton. She will exchange mails 
again with the No. V. Steamer, at Barbadoes, and proceed through the Islands to Sk. 
Thomas, where, having delivered the Home and Intercolonial Mails, she will prepare 
as expeditiously as possible to resume the services as before. 

In case the No. V. Steamer should not reach Barbadoes within the estimated time, the 
No. IV. Steamer will endeavour to meet her by approaching St. Vincent, and, if nec¬ 
essary, -will sight the anchorage at that Island, but will make no stop there unless 
the No. IV. Steamer should be seen, in which case she will stay long enough only to 
receive the mails, &c. destined lor places on her route. 















































































128 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Should circumstances at any time occur to occasion the withdrawal of either the 
No. IY. orV. Steamers, the remaining Steamer must perform the two routes combined ; 
namely, by proceeding from St. Thomas to Barbadoes, according to Table IV., from 
Barbadoes to Tobago, as indicated by Table No. V., and thence to Demerara, and 
vice versa, abridging stoppages at all places so as to ensure the Ship’s return to St. 
Thomas by the appointed time. 


Table No. V. —Trinidad route. 
TWICE A MONTH. 


Dates. 

Places. 

Distances in miles. 

Speed per hour. 

Steam¬ 

ing. 

S top- 
pages. 

Coals. 

From 

South¬ 

ampton 

Arrival. 

Departure. 

GO 

5* 

fi 

Hours. 

Days. 

Hours. 

Days. 

Hours. 


22 and 7 7 p m 

From Rarhadoes 








20 

1 

23 and 8, 5 a. m. 

23 and 8, 7a.m. 

To St. Vincent- 

90 

9 

.... 

10 


2 


20 

11 

23 and 8 1 p xn 

23 and 8 1pm 

“ (la.rriae.mi . 

50 

9 


6 




20 

19 

23 and 8, 5 p. m 

24 and 9, 1 a. m 

“ Grenada. 

32 

9 


4 

.... 

8 

Coal .. 

20 

23 

24 and 9, 11 a m 

24 and 9, 5 p. m 

“ Trinidad._ 

94 

9 


10 


6 


21 

17 

25 and 10, 2 a. m 

27 and 12 3 a., m 

“ Tobago ...__ 

85 

9 


9 

2 

1 


22 

8 

27 and 12, noon 

27 and 12, 6 p. m 

“ Trinidad . 

85 

9 


9 


6 


24 

18 

28 and 13, 4 a.m. 

28 and 13, 8 a. m. 

“ Grenada . 

94 

9 


10 

.... 

4 

Coal .. 

25 

10 

28 and 13, noon 

28 and 13 norm 

“ Ca.rriacnn . . 

32 

9 


4 




25 

18 

28 and 13, 6 p. m 

28 and 13, 8 p. m. 

“ St. Vincent_ 

50 

9 


6 


2 


26 


29 and 14, 6 a. m 


“ Barbadoes. 

90 

9 


10 

8 

13 


26 

12 




702 


3 

6 

11 

18 





Days. Hours. 

Time Out to Trinidad. 21 17 

Ditto Home from ditto. 22 6 

Course of Post. 47 6 


Remarks on Table No. Y. 

On the arrival at Barbadoes of the No. IV. Ship, thisNo. V. Steamer will receive all 
Mails, &c., for places enumerated in the Table, and proceed to deliver them accord- 
ingly. 

On the return voyage, this Vessel will leave Tobago precisely at 3 a. m. on the 25th 
day after the Out-Mails were dispatched from Southampton. 

Returning to Barbadoes, she will deliver to the No. IV. Steamer going to St. Thomas, 
the Homeward and other Mails for places in that direction, and having received any 
Mails for Table V., will hold herself in readiness to resume the service as before. 

When necessary, this Steamer will be governed by the remarks on Table No. IV., 
so far as they may apply to her. 

The Carriacou Mails are to be received from, or dropped into, a boat which will be 
dispatched by the inhabitants to meet this Steamer on her voyage between St. Vin¬ 
cent and Grenada, and also on her return voyage between Grenada and St. Vincent. 

Should such boat, however, not be in attendance to exchange Mails when the 
Steamer is passing Carriacou, or should stress of weather prevent the exchange taking 
place, the Mails are in such cases to be taken on and landed at the next place marked 
in the route, whether it be at Grenada or St. Vincent. 





























































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


129 


Table No. VI .—Nassau route. 
ONCE A MONTH. 


Dates. 

Places. 

Distances in miles. 

Speed per hour. 

Time. 

Stoppages. 

Coals. 

From South¬ 
ampton. 

Arrival. 

Departure. 

\ 

Days. 

1 

Hours. 

Q 

Hours. 

Days. 

Hours. 


4, 6 p. m.... 

St. Thomas___ 








17 


11, 6 p. m. 

17,6 a. m.... 

Nassau. 

860 

5 

7 


5 

12 


24 


1,2 p. m. 


St. Thomas. 

860 

2* 

14 

8 

3 

4 

.... 

43 

20 




1, 720 

.... 

21 

8 

8 

• 

16 





Days. Hours. 


Time Out to Nassau. 24 — 

Ditto Home from ditto. 32 18 

Course of Post. 62 6 


Remarks on Table No. VI. 

This No. VI. Vessel having received at St. Thomas from the Out, Home and 
Intercolonial Vessels, all Mails, &c., for Nassau, will proceed to deliver them forth¬ 
with, taking care, on the return voyage, to leave Nassau precisely at 6 a. m. on the 
30th day after the Out-Mails were dispatched from Southampton* 

On returning to St. Thomas, this Vessel will deliver Home and Intercolonial Mails, 
&c., and hold herself in readiness to resume the service on this route as before. 


Table No. VII .—Brazil route. 

* ONCE A MONTH. 

{This Table, transmitted by Company in Letter of 17th April, 1851, approved of on 13th May, 1851. See 

Letter from Company 12th May. 


Dates. 


Arrival. 

Departure. 

14, 6 a. m. 

18, 1 a. m- 

19 Tinny! 

9, 6 p. m. 

15, 6 a. m. 

18, 7 a. m. 

19, 4 p. m. 

23^ 2 p. m- 

1, midnight. 

4, 3 p. m- 

8, 11 p. m- 

19, 2 a. m- 

21, 9 p. m- 

12 H , 7T1 

24’ 2 p. m. 

2, 6 p. m. 

5, 3 p. m- 

15, 8 a. m. 

19, 6 p. m- 

22, 6 p. m. 

2, 2 a. m. 

6, noon. 

8, 3 a. m. 

11, 4 a. m. 

*1ft 4 n m 

6, 6 p. m. 

8, 9 a. m. 

12, 4 a. m. 




Places. 

f 

Distances in miles. 

Speed per hour. 

Steam¬ 

ing. 

l 

Stop- | 
page. 

Coals. 

From 
South¬ 
ampton . 

c3 

p 

1 Hours. 

02 

§* 

P 

a? 

3 

o 

w 

Days. 

Hours. 

From South .amp ton. .. 







Coal.. 



To Lisbon . 

866 

8 

4 

12 

1 


Coal.. 

4 

12 

“ Madeira. 

535 

8 

2 

19 

.... 

6 

Coal .. 

8 

7 


260 

9 

1 

5 


4 


9 

18 

“ St. Vincent. 

850 

9 

3 

22 

1 

0 

Coal.. 

13 

20 

u p^rnftiRbiioo 

1, 600 

9 

7 

10 


18 


22 

6 

“ Bahia . 

410 

9 

1 

21 

.... 

1 

0 

Coal.. 

24 

21 

“ RIO DE JANEIRO 

720 

9 

3 

8 

6 

9 

Coal.. 

29 

5 

“ Bahia. 

720 

8 

3 

18 

.... 

16 

Coal.. 

39 

8 

u 1*6X11 rVrnhiic.o ___ 

410 

8 

2 

3 


21 


42 

3 

“ St. Vincent. 

1,600 

8 

8 

8 

i 

0 

Coal.. 

51 

8 

“ Teneriffe.. 

850 

8 

4 

10 

.... 

6 

. 

56 

18 

“ Madeira. 

260 

8 

1 

9 

.... 

6 

Coal.. 

58 

9 

“ Lisbon. 

535 

8 

2 

19 

l 

.... 

Coal.. 

61 

10 

‘ Southampton. 

866 

8 

4 

12 

... 

.... 

Coal.. 

66 

22 


10, 482 

.... 

52 

8 

14 

14 





«• 


Time Out to Rio de Janeiro 

Ditto Home from ditto. 

Course of Post. 


0G7 


Days. Hours. 
29 5 

31 8 

. 66 22 




9 




































































































































130 


AMFRICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Remarks on Table No. VII. 

The Steamer employed on this route will perform the service as prescribed by the 
Table, exchanging at Rio de Janeiro, Mails, &c., with the Vessel on Route, No. VIII. 

On the return voyage this Steamer will coal complete at Rio de Janeiro, and leave 
there at 8 a. m. on the 36th day after her departure from Southampton. In case the 
No. VIII. Vessel should not reach Rio de Janeiro before the time above mentioned, this 
No. VII. Steamer will await her arrival eight clear days (if necessary) beyond the ap¬ 
pointed time for starting, after which period she will take her departure, whether the 
No. VIII. Vessel has arrived or not. The stoppages at Pernambuco and Bahia are regu¬ 
lated with a view to afford 12 hours daylight at each place, both on the Outward and 
Homeward voyages, and whatever may be the time of arrival, the Steamers are not 
to depart until 12 hours daylight have elapsed, except in cases where the Vessel may 
anchor by 8 a. m., then they are to proceed the same evening, provided the weather 
has not prevented the landing and embarking of Mails, Passengers, &.c. 


Table No. VIII .—River Plate route. 

ONCE A MONTH. 

[Approved of 13th December, 1851. See Letter from Company 4th December.] 


Dates. 

Places. 

05 
<V 

.2 

U 

r* 

o 

Steam¬ 

ing. 

Stop¬ 

pages. 

Coals. 

From 

South¬ 

ampton. 

Arrival. 

Departure. 

y 

O 

Q 

cf 

■H 

CO 

Q 

<v 

cu 

35 

<v 

Days. 

Hours. 

Days. 

Hours. 

Days. 

05 

U 

P 

o 

W 


13, 4 p. m _ 

From Rio de Janeiro.. 







Coal .. 

33 

38 

40 

22 

18 

12 

18, noon . 

19, 4 p. m. 

To Monte Video. 

1,040 

130 

9 

4 

20 

1 

4_ 

20, 6 a. m ... 

3, 4 p. m. 

“ BUENOS AYRES 

9 


14 

13 

10 


4, 6 a. m_ 

11, 8 p. m_ 

6, noon. 

“ Monte Video . 

130 

9 


14 

2 

6 


54 

12 

14 


“ Rio de Janeiro. 

1,040 

9 

4 

20 

2 

8 

Coal .. 

61 









2. 340 


10 

20 

19 

6 










.... 


Time Ont to Bnenos Ayres.... 








Days. 

Hours. 

12 

Ditto Home from ditto. 

Course of Post. 









22 


Remarks on Table No. VIII. 

This No. VIII. Vessel having received at Rio de Janeiro Out and other Mails, &c. 
will deliver them according to the Table, either by proceeding with them to Buenos 
Ayres, or by transhipping them to a smaller Steamer stationed at Monte Video for 
the purpose; in either case taking care to leave Buenos Ayres on the return voyage 
precisely at 4 p. m. on the 54th day after the Out-mails were dispatched from South¬ 
ampton. 

On returning to Rio de Janeiro, the Homeward Mails, &c., Avill be delivered to the 
No. VII. Steamer, from which Out-mails will be received in exchange. This No. VIII. 
Vessel will then coal, &c. as expeditiously as possible, and proceed to perform the 
service as before. 




















































RATES FOR GOVERNMENT PASSENGERS. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


131 


P4 

m 


O 


(1) m-t ' f - 

> a a 
+3 d © 


® ^[>1 
Moo 


Q 


® 00 00 
IgS 


§2 • 

5gS 

&> 


* I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ® I I I I I I I II I f-l II 

| eiio m | | latota | »ft <o | oot»iftoiflinoio | looisiommio 
ctjfNeooiTtttNcocociNNeoiMffQooiMW | Wf-iT^cvjoicoeisoeoiMiMC^c^e^ 

^I I i I I I tI i M I I I I I I I I I I I III [| | III 

*S I^SS I I SSS I S3 I I ISS ISS 13 IS ISSSSS 

^1111111111 i i i i i i i i i i i m i i i i i n 

* i i 00 1 i i i i i i i r i i is 11 i 11 i i i i h i it 

etj0!NX(j.0>caNa0!0i'»®HNooH0i®t'0io®N05^'®0)affi84 

*« I I I I 1 ) 1 l .1 I I I I I 1 1 I I I M l M I I I IT 1 f 

«i i i 00 1 i i i i i i i r i i i s i i i i i ii i i i i i i r 

MONCO^OJ^lWOiOOJWOiHMOOHa^t^OOONOJTftOJOJOJaO: 

»H rH rH •—I ri ^ ^ ^ 

| «« | w® | | j ® | tocococo® | | to | | | | | | | I | | » 

^ | io ai cm | t-- r~j | | | ^ ^ S 3 S |ioai | | | io | j | j | c~ 

e^iaco-^iooiotosouoiomcouocoscioio | iocoaoiowi«coif:«oio»fiio>a'*i 

*e M I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ® I r I I I I I I I I I I I I 

^|oioio|ioiOj | | |2|J3| | | |jf$ 

C|)ON05®OWMOOOCOONMHHHO«OOOCNOMOOOOOO. 

HHHHnHHHHHfiHH rH HHHHHHHr-HHH 

■« I II I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 

•i I |SS ISS I I IS ISSSSS-I | ®s | | | IS I I I IS 

■e 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r 

•i I ISS ISS I I IS ISSSSS IISIIIIISIIIIS 

CUOiftOOWOM'OOOhO^^NWMOMWOOOiOO^OOOOt- 
^<N(NHCCCQlN(N(N<NWNWC'INW01 CQr-iCOC^<M(M<M<M<M<M<MCQ<Mr-» 

■« i i r if i i i i i i 00 1 00 °°” im oo iimiiit 
»S I l”S I ISSS I S'® I^SS I ”3*3 ISSSSSSS 

-e I I I 00 I I I I I I I V* \**"* I I” I'* I I I 00 I I I I I 

* 11 I® I I I I I I I IS I SS® I I ® I S I I 1 50 I I I I I 

Ci)iftOTfiXifiiOOiO»OlOOlOOOOOOCCOiftOXiO<OlOOlOMiCiO»OWlO 

■« r i ri i i i 111 i 00 1 00 00 ® i r i 00 1 i r i i i i i 

* I I IS I I I I I I I I* 5 l®®S I IS I® I 1 IS I I I I I 

^SSSSSSSSSSSSSsSS^SSSgSSSSSgSgSSS; 

ISS” I |®®SS N I l N l°^S 

^ ic co o co t—j <o | wt'CifflaaotoaoN |oowoo'-*t^'«<uO'<*aoi-i--ia_ 

: • j : : : i I i : : i : ! i i i : i • • i : : : i : i ill. 

: : ; i : : : : : ; 

: | : i i : :^-o 

jii i Miiiii! ii ji !!i:ii: • i i i ^ 

i i : ig ;: 

5 '■$%*% \ii :g|S- i i :s i|| : ils| i . 
lii s!|l!:l^i ll^l Hl%h 


rd 

A 

O 


<D 00 • 

®rr- £ 

13,8 


pqoof 


m 

o 































































Table No. t—Continued, 


132 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


Deck Passengers. 

Children. 

Between 

3 and 8 

Years. 

1 1 1 I 1 1 I 

1 t> io to m 

1-1 

CO CO rH ©Q ©4 CO 

Between 

8 and 12 
Years. 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

I X* © o © o 

1 HHHHrl 

<o co co x* to i 

Woman. 

i i i i i i j 
i” i i i i 

(M CO t> © O) CO 1 

H H rH 

Man. 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 00 1 1 1 1 I 

<M CO t- Oi O CO 

H H rH 

Fore Cabin Passengers. 

Children. 

Between 

3 and 8 
Years. 

•Mill 

l> U© I I o 

HnH 1 I rH 

CO CO lO lO 

Between 

8 and 12 
Years. 

MINI 
3SS 1 1 1 

CO to b- © © lO 

H H rH rH rH 

Woman. 

MINI 

SSIIll 

t> rH l© O O © 

<M CO rH <M <M CO 

Man. 

MINI 

SIMM 

hHOOOO 
<M CO rH <M <M CO 

Chief Cabin Passengers. 

Children. 

Between 

3 and 8 
Years. 

j 00 | | 00 

1 CO CD O O CO 

I ririHH 

o r-« i> o 

rH rH rH 

Between 

8 and 12 
Years. 

|00^.| |« 

rs i is 

©N^lOlOH 
WWHHHW 

Lady. 

1 00 | | 00 

|COCO | I'D 

O^COOOM 
rjt <N CO CO ^ 

Officer. 

Tt< 00 t> CO 

CO rH i© CO 

rH r-* rH rH rH 

(M 00 H* Cl <M CO 
^ H* ©J CO CO 

Places, 

Santa Martha. 

Tampico. 

Tenerife. 

Tobago.. 

Trinidad. 

Vera Cruz. 


































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


*133 


| 

g 


5 


& 

© 

$ 

•§ 

4 


o 

£5 


« 

◄ 

H 


S * 
£ & 
< § 
1 § 

s 1 

^ I 


o 


.a 

s 


§ 

33 

s 

a 


i* 

P4 

rM 


? 

Ph 

A 

•r-4 

■s 

o 




« 

Ph 

A 

3 


r 3 

o 


'd 

3 

o 


©«> ^ 
®-d 

!«£ 


P°°>' 


A 

V 


goo . 

la § 
2«^ 


*1 * 

■s §£ 

poo^ 


*111111111111111111*111 
^ t- | t-ioe-jojot-t-^t-wt-o | ooNt-owt. 


I I I I I I I I I 

c- j t~ o t> t> t> w 


(ft a CO ^ 03 <M <N CQ ©4 j N N W IM CO N W | MH^IlMMNMNOOiNNNNN 


« ! I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 
• 3 | 212 2! S ° 21 "' f< ^ 2! S 2! | | | | J3 ^ | S 21 | 2! I'* | ^^2121° 


* 1111111111111111 m 11 m i. i 111111 

. CO | 00 | 00 | j CO CO 00 00 | 00 | | | | O 00 j |00|00|00| 00 00 00 c0j 

awat-cj^--ao)MO^a©NooHO)©t'fflcqffliNa*taaafflC) 

CjJ i-l lH HH rH riHrlri rl iH rH rH 


* I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H I I I I I | 

^ 00 | 00 | 00 | | 00 00 CC 00 | GO | j | | ©00 | |CO | 00 |00 | 00 00 00 00 | 

GJ|05MOt>05HHOi05COC5r-iO)0(NOOHO^^C5M05WOi^C50J053>OJ 

® i—l rH t-H t—I rH H H ri H r—< rH f— it—1 




CO | CO CO CO | | CO CO CD CO | CO | | CO CO C5 CO CO co co CO CO | CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 

| iCC^^00(M05(MClt^C^iO(Mt^01C<IC^iMI> 
QjiOCOUOOOiOCOCOiOlOfMtOCOiOlOCOiOlO | lOCOOOiOCOiOCOlOCOlOiOlOiOTti 


^I I 1 I I I M I I 1 I I II I 1° I I II I I I ! I I I I I I 

• lOO^iftiOOOiflifl^iOOiO I OmiOt>iD*OiO»OiOiOO»OiOiOiD»OiDiO 
HH TH | rH iH T—i i—I rH rH 

ftiOWO(DONNOOTj(ONOONr 
'1 hH HHHHMHH HrinHHr 


HOIOCDOMONOMOOOOOO 


I 


I I M II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II 


I I I I I 


•O IOO® I IOOOO I® I I ®®lO®®®®®® I o ® ® ® ® ® ® 

’rI 1 I—I •—! r—I | I HHHH I rH I li—I i—li—IHHHr(i—It—( | —I ■—iHrI i—It—Irt 

J®i©®<N®l©iOC®00®iO®®l© / M<NC0®CM©J®t-®u©®tn®®®®t- 
• CM CM CM CO CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM C4 HM(N(M<NCJ i NNNN«(NH 


•« I I I I 11 I I I 11 I I I I I I I 11 I I I I I I I 11 II I 

-S ISSS I ISSSS 12 | IS3S2S22S3 13322322 

cJO»OOWOiOOOOOOO»flOC 
^ CM rv] M fM (M CM CJ N (N W N C 


id 

o 


gT> £ 

£§s 


d CM . 

-H 3 © 

© w Sj 

pqoo^ 


>> 

1 

H 


$s 

o 


Si 


J 00 00 "Stl 00 00 CO 00 00 00 | 00 00 00 00 | 

• to I CO CO CO CO CO ® ® ® ® CO ® C© | <© !© H< C© ICO® 

‘OlH | rH HHHH »H I rH.H | rH 

i)j[roi>r)itraat*t'Ni>ai>«o®WHh.aHji>ot'ONHt't«t«D-t« 


00 Tj' 00 H< njl 00 00 00 00 t* 00 00 | 00 00 00 00 I'rJ'OO | 00 | 00 00 00 00 00 j 

CO CO !© CO !© CO ® 


I Hft 00 ^ 00 00 ^ H* 00 H* I H< H> H< 


^ | V.’ w W W ~-J' N' —|- 'j w V 'J | vi V j VI- j wv VI- | VI- j vj' CO v!' -J^ ^ "H* j 

^ co |co®co®®cocococoococo | coco® CO | ® jo j co |oo®eocococo j 

a}ift®ioooioooooi©uoio»oooif : 5®®<©coc©i©®oc»o®u©®ioc«i©»rti©i©m 

“HOHOHHHHH H-rHHNHH HHNHCIHNHNhHHHH 


^ 00 | 00 Tf 00 •«* H< 00 00 00 00 Tjl 00 OO | 00 CO ® 00 | H< 00 | 00 | 00 -rf 00 00 00 CO | 

^to | <© co ® co co so to to to co to to |tot©coto I” 50 I® |<©Mtot©toto | 

-,iHOH©H®©HHHHfflHm©MM®HOfflHOH©HtDHHHlHO 


I CO T* 00 ; t© OS t- 


^rHcoeO'4<iOHHTfeo®co |>-h<m | i-i co u© | bnoh j co | j > 

^ cm ® t~ co | oococirtc»HciHHmt> I o *q ; ■© ©i i ©i i cm oo rH ® oo ® io 

rH HH I rH iH HHHhH I HH I HH | H I H HH HH 

OjCOCOCOiHH»®®H'COCMH<®CO®CO»rt®t~COiHiHCOeOCOeOCO®COCOC005*H 

^ctSTTcoOMcocoMco-HcoH'cocoH'coco cocQ^co^cortcoiocoeocococo 


05 ^ : p 

© a 




a a 

* 3 


3-g 

a .-S ? 


o a - 


p © 

Hd 

-H a} 
® P* 
© ST 


a a 
© © 
© © 


•3.2 a'o.t ® S g j 1*5 ©ia| a 2 S 

gpi-Sas!! p|| , 'w,3Ht>p 


fs-eg’EisfaagiS&s ?1L 

flaSstjSjjDOsJit. a a o « 5 -S .2 ^2 H £ £ £ ® o -a ^ ^ ^ ^ 











































































Table No. II—Continued. 


134 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


m 

u 

<x> 

tfj 

P 

(V 

to 

to 

P 

(U 

o 

<D 

fi 


P 

a? 


43 

O 


goo . 

£ PS 03 
■H Cj ^ 


I 

rH 

COHC-l^M 


g <M . 

1 1 1 1 1 

I 

OS 

HH rH | 

P 0> 

<D cShH 
Woo^ 

CO CO co 


P 

cti 

s 

o 

£ 


00 j 00 CO | 



II 1 1 I 

§ 

CO | CO oo j 


Ol b- a C) <M 

r-i rH 


to 

© 

bfl 

p 

<£> 

a? 

to 

c3 

Ph 


rO 

C$ 

o 

a> 

h 

o 

hH 


CQ 

a> 

bD 

P 

a> 

m 

to 

a 

ft 


c3 

o 

<H 

a? 

•>—« 

o 


p 

a> 


O 


Children. 

Between 

3 and 8 
Tears. 

CO | CO CO co 

C- to CM 03 L- 
rH iH rH 

CO CO to to co 

Between 

8 and 12 
Tears. 

1 1 II 1 

to o to to to 

rH rH 

CO t— O O CO 

rH rH rH rH 


• 

P 

1 1 I 1 1 


CS 

cj 

O 1 © o o 


p 

rH | n H H 


w 

K. 

MOOOt- 


p 

<M H M <M (M 


• 

P 

1 1 1 1 1 
© i © © © 


cc 

rH | H H H 



to © © t> 



C* TH M <M <M 


g co . 

£ P aS 
cS H) 


00 00 00 00 
CO CD CO CO 


OiOt'OO 

i—1 rH 


P CM 

<V r-\ fA 

nj Y 2 

^ 2 5 

pqoo^ 


^ ^ ^ 

CO CO CO CO 


O - lO 1 C o 

(M H n H d 


3 


CO 00 00 oo 

co co co co 


HMHHO 
Tf <M CO CO t** 


<D 

5E 

o 


CO 00 <M CO O 

rH 

CO r—t OJ CO 

t-H 

to ^ ^ CO 
H< <M CO CO t* 


to 

£> 

O 

a3 

5 


8$ 


^5 2 


CSJ 

^ g 

o <S r P 
blfC U 


c3 


a P43.2 p 

c$ <X> O n ® 
































































Table No. III .—Fates for Government Passengers. 
INTERCOLONIAL, VOYAGES. 

(Mentioned and referred to in the Contract hereunto annexed.) 

Fares in Silver Dollar's, at 4-s. 2d. each. ~t 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


135 



Jr ai © 

® js 

P +- :c~ 


a o p §. 


■ «s ^ 
M -g ©■« 

-•Ha® 

s o.s . 

3 «o 

i 

o © o W) 
„ ro © ts 
* 00 ° Jl 

g « 

© P +3 


a -- o 

•©•P ® 
£ © > 
0)vH ? 

^ 2 ”3 

^ a x 
a x 
«5 ® « 

00 2 © 


3” 
© b 
«'© 
© P 

9 n 

°£ 

95 

►H 'S3 

, © © 
1 © bJD 

B1 

•m « 

1 -® © 

+-, 

! © 5» 

I 5 © 

! sa 
, © 

I J3 © 

’ o 58 

+j ©3 

! _ M 


•znjQ bjoa 1 

oi'MOimoiooiooLooooouoioioisisioifl i© i© i© ® © ■ 

C'IMC0©O-»P;M!MNM00©r'IN0'l(BINNfaCM ■ CM CM rH CO CO • 

— —• rH — CM rH rH rH CM rH tr rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH ' rH rH rH rH I 

* -pEpiniax 

looio ooinoinoiomicmioicicooooo • ©!©©© i© 
HjlCOClCMCMCOHtrHIftHttOCM© — COHj-CMlftlH-lftCO '©WOH 05 

HH rH H M H t—| rH • CM • rH 

•oSnqox 

»©i©©©©i©i©©®i©ifti©i©ini©i©©©L©®© 'ooo ■ © i© 

• 5© CO © • rH 05 

rHrH rH H IN HH rH • CM • rH 

•ootdurex 

■ 

oooooooooowiomioooooooo ■©© ioiouj 

COH,-tOrmmH,M?5NOClOtrmCOC. MCOCOP5 'COC© CO CO rH 

rH rH rH CM CM rH rH rH CM r rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH • rH rH rH rH 

•^uooniA '4S 

J 

oi.oo,oinmooioooooo®oioir5oioto i© i© © © © 

COrHHOHMCOHMWlOH©OMMOCO»CO(M r*l • 00 CO CO 00 

rHrH rHrHCMrH ,—1 • * rH rH 

•snuioqx '4S 

O O © © O O o O O Ift 1C IS lO LC © o O IS 1(5 « O ■ '©©©©l© 

Nrj,^l®t-®MM'ffllN©©T(ilOMMfflrHrHrH» . ■ H( rf IS IS CO 
rH rH • • rH rH 

. 

^ireg 

© © © • • 1© i© ® 'l©!©!©!©!©©©©!©!©!©!© ©©©©©l© 

to oo so • • © e- oo 'i'H'ooo®tHffloisift>ncr • rj, oo oo © ® e- 

' •' ' rH CM rH ' rH rH 

_ ___| oirtiooiraoomiomooooooioiaiftio ■ . wioiomio© 

niOnT IQ 1 NHWOO^HWMHtOOOOHNOM'jllM • • T»> CM 00 CO CO CC 

• ^ 1 — rH rH rH CM rH 1 . 1 —1 r-i 

■s.fflS '4S 

OOOtOtOtOOOtOtOOOOOOO to o »o • lo ■ »o O to o o o 

r-tCOCOX3ilO(NCOHHCOO>l>OOWHOOHW ' Cl • Cl CO '-O V ^ CO 

*■—1 r -1 1 —) • * rH rH 

•001*1 

| opioj ‘s.uenp -*s 

OOOOOtOOOOtOOOOOOOtOlO < tO tO 'OOtOOOO 

CO LO 1C t> 00 t>» iO O O O O CO lO TT O N (N . C3 rf< . r— tO CO O O CO 

r—i rH rH • • rH rH 

•8IA9_fJ 

O O O to too O O lO to O O O O O O to to o »o ■ to O to ooo 

HCOCOXOiOCKOHHCOOtsOOWH CQ 1 CO Hd '(MWO^rr© 
r—i tH —i » • rH rH 


OOOOOtOOOOtOtOtOtOtOOO • to to to to OOOOOtO 

t- O C5 - 'N r-X C* H MO ^ J, C CO t'" • ZD ID ZD CG tOOOOOOO 

HriH rH rH 03 rH • rHiHrHrH 

•^naaos^aojA 

© i© l© l© l© © l© l© © o ® © © © l© • l© © l© © © ■ l© l© 1ft l© l© © 

rH Cl CM 00 OlSHCMHHCOat-OOH • OO — CO — CM • CM CM ® CO CO 5© 

rH rH rH • • rH rH 

•onbiarprej^ 

tOOtOtOtOtOOtOtOOOOOO • O to to to to O to to to to to o 

HN:iC50TtrHC)C4H^COOQ - N O Cl rf !N ri • CO rH I s - CC CO t> 
rH rH rH 03 • • rH rH 

•BOteurep 

I0®l©l©»©©lftl©l©10©©© 'lftl©l©l©l©l©l© •l©l©l©©lft© 
l©t~© — C100©l©rri©©rHCM IS 1© r LO IS IS 1© 'i©i©0O©©CO 

rH rH rH rH rH * 

•{aaionp 

ini©®©®,®ifti©©ir:©© '©irti©©©©!©!© '©i©i©©>©© 

l©l©l©OrH®l©i©CO>©COrf< ,CCll©l©©inCOl©l© ■H'l©rH©l©rH 
rH rH rH rH ‘ rH * rH rH 

ioooioir.oooioioo ■ o c »o »c to »o »o 10 • to o to o o o 
•8'RjnnnOTT 1 ^-COCOt-X^^-rCO-nCD • rH CO -f CO CO ■**• 

t AX. r—i f h t“—^ ^ r«H * h f-H < *-H rH rH rH f-H rH 1 rr rH rH rr rH rH 

•BUBAUH 

l© 1© t© © © 1ft 1© 1ft © l© © © ^ 1© l© © l© l© 1ft l© • ® 1© l© l© l© © 

OOCHlSHCCIxa to ®rf'C5©H<C!5©05® ' OO © CM © © CM 

•H r—< r—i rH rH iH H • rH t—^ r“< rH 

•odnopepBUQ 

©i©i©i© i©©©!©® •i©i©i©ift©ift©®©©i© -©©©mifti© 
rn Cl CM®©!© — Cl CM CC © e* 00 rH r-> © CM H Cl H 'CCCMt-CCCO® 

rH rn ' rH rH * rH rH 

•uavox LuO 

• 

OOOOOlOOO *10 10 101010000 10 10 10 1000000010 
00303^01^^01 •OXH'MO^OHOaOHiOOOClC'KOO^ 
rH i" r—t H i—< • rH »—i 03 rH rH rH r— < rH 03 rH rH 03 


OtOOtOtOtOO *100000000 to to OtOtO • to O to lO to o 

CO H r O H .-c CO • CO O lO rH o O CO CO O CO O O C3 *. rf r -1 CO Ol I-H 00 

rH rH • rH r - — 03 rH rH * ri rH 

•Boraimo(j 

i© © i© i© i© i© ■ i© i© © © © © ® ® © i© i© i© i© © ■ i© in i© i© i© © 

rH CM CM © © H* •CMCMrHr+©00©rHCM©CMr(.©MrH ■ © H N CO CO l> 

rH • rH rH CM J rH rH 

•Banaaraod 

©©1©©© •©©!©!© ©©©©©©!©©©©»© • 1© 1© 1ft © © © 

■l©rt,©l©OOrrCMCV3e©©CO®©»rr •t~Ht'rHHt>H<rH 
rHrH* rHrHOlrHrH rH • 03 03 

* _*_ 

•soaSnqQ 

©©©© •!©©©© l©l©l©l©lft©©®l©l©l©>©0®©©©©l© 

QO©©Cl 'CM©®CMQO©CM®rr©aOOt-t-Cr©ClS®©©—• — © 
rH rH • rH rH t-H CM rHrH rH rH Cl rt H H 

•BU9§BqprB3 

£^>00 •' O to O O O to to to to LO o O O to to to to o o o o o o to 

t—OO •CC'-'XOi0t>t0HOOXt>rHCDcbOXHtf5OOOO00 
irH rH 03 rH rH r-trHHr-H 

<—, © -minirtooiooooooooirtiooioi© • i© © i© © i© i© 
•nOOBiaan^ ! CO rH '©HMeOHMWiO^aOWCOOCOOCOW ••^ir-lOOMCaCO 

•soop^qj^g* 

© inooooisisaooooo-ioinoifti© ■ in to © m is © 

CO CM© — COCOCMCOC©!© — ©©C©CO©CO©COCM 'rtiCMCOCOCCOO 

• rHrH rH r^ CM — — | rH —< 

•nnSfiuY 

' to to O O O to to O O to to to to to O O to O to o o »o O to o ».o 

•03030 OtOrlOlClrHWO *C003t^C0^O 

r—t rH rH rH • r- rH 

Places. 

Antigua . .* . 

Barbadoes . 

Carriac-u . 

Carthagena . 

Chagres. . 

Demerara. 

Dominica . 

Grenada. 

Grey Town. 

Guadaloupe . 

Havana . 

Honduras . 

Jacrnel -^. 

Jamaica . 

Martinique . 

Montserrat . 

Nassau .. 

Nevis . 

St. Juan’s, Porto Rico 

St. Kitt's . . . 

St. Lucia . 

Santa Martha . 

St. Thomas . 

St. Vincent. 

Tampico . 

Tobago . 

Trinidad . 

V era Cruz. 



































































































































136 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Table No. IV .—Rates for Government Passengers. 


INTERCOLONIAL VOYAGES, BRAZIL, <fcc. 

[Mentioned and referred to in the Contract hereunto annexed.] 

Fares in Silver Dollars, at 4s. 2d. each. 

Chief Cabin Passengers conveyed between any of the undermentioned places by Government ordory 
to be charged two-thirds of the rates which may be charged to ordinary passengers foi the time >eing: 
Fore Cabin Passengers one-half, and Deck P ssengers one-fifth of the said rates. Children between 8 
and 12 years of age, one-half of the amount charged for their Parents, and between 3 and 8 years one- 
fourth of ditto; under 3 year <>f age, to be carried free. An additional charge of 2s 6d per diem to be 
made for Officers, on account of the established allowance of Wine and Beer. Male Servants to be con- 
veyed intei colonially for one-half, and Female Servants for two thirds ot the rate charged 101 their eni 
ployers, exclusive oif the charge of 2s. 6d. per diem for Wine and Beer. 


Places. 


Lisbon. 

Madeira. 

Teneritfe. 

St. Vincent ... 
Pernambuco.. 

Bahia .. 

Rio de Janeiro 
Monte Video.. 
Buenos Ayres. 


o 

.a 


ci 

3 


tg 

‘E 

© 

a 


zc 


© 

o 

£ 

& 

2 

ci 

a 

o 

P4 


cS 

« 


a 

ce 

© 

.© 

£ 


o 

© 

r d 


t-. 

'A 

m 

o 

ft 

© 

© 

FQ 


The payment for the passage ordered at the expense of the public for any person will only be made 
on the production of the order for the passage, and of a Certificate from the person in the following 
form, viz : 


"I hereby certify that on the-, I embarked at-, as a (here insert Chief or Fore-Cabin 

or Deck, as the case maybe), Passenger on board the Royal Mail Steam Paeket Company’s Vessel 

-, for passage to-, and landed at-, on the-.” 

To this Certificate the following addition to be made in every Case of a Male Cabin Passenger, viz: 

'‘I further certify that the first Dinner Meal taken on board was on'the-, and the last 

Dinner Meal on the-. 

“Dated this -day of-. 

*■ it ) i 


And the correctness of the dates must be corroborated by the Master of the Packet, adding under* 
neath the Passenger’s signature: 

“The dates inserted in this Certificate are correct. 

“(Signature) -, 

“Master of the Packet." 


Articles of Agreement made the 23d day of September in the Year of our Lord 1850, 
between “the Pacific Steam Navigation Company” of the one part and the Com¬ 
missioners for executing the office of Lord High Admiral of the United Kingdom of 
Great Britain and Ireland (for and on behalf of Her Majesty) of the other part 

Witness that the said company in consideration of the payment hereinafter stipu¬ 
lated to be made do for themselves and their successors hereby agree with the said 
Commissioners that the said Company shall and will during the continuance of this 
Contract provide maintain keep seaworthy and in complete repair and readiness 
for the purpose of conveying as hereafter provide Her Majesty’s Mails (which term 
of Her Majesty’s Mails is intended and understood by the parties hereto to mean such 
of Her Majesty’s Mails and all Despatches and Bags of Letters as shall at any time 
and from time to time by the said Commissioners or Her Majesty’s Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral or any of the Officers or Agents of the said Commissioners or Postmaster General 
be required to be conveyed and whether such Mails Despatches and Bags of Letters 
be intended for any of the ports or places mentioned in this Contract or an other ports 
or places) a sufficient number not less than six of good substantial and efficient 
Steam Vessels to be employed between Panama and Callao and Callao and Valpar¬ 
aiso in South America and such other intermediate ports only as shall be approved 
of or directed by the said Commissioners each and every of such Vessels to be always 
supplied with first-rate appropriate steam-engines of not less than 170 collective horse 
power and that all the said Vessels shall be always supplied and furnished with all 
necessary and proper machinery engines apparel furniture stores tackle boats fuel 
oil tallow provisions fresh water anchors cables fire pumps and other proper mean® 









































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


137 


for extinguishing lire and whatsoever else may he requisite and necessary for equip¬ 
ping the said Vessels and rendering them constantly efficient for the service hereby 
contracted to be performed and also manned and provided with duly qualified and 
competent Officers and Engineers and a sufficient crew of able seamen and other men 
and to be in all respects as to Vessels engines equipments engineers officers and crew 
subject in the first instance and from time to time and all times afterwards to the ap¬ 
proval of the said Commissioners and of such other persons as shall at any time or 
from time to time have authority under the said Commissioners to inspect and ex¬ 
amine the same 

l hat the said Company shall and will during the continuance of this Contract in 
every case diligently faithfully and to the satisfaction of the said Commissioners 
and with all due speed convey Her Majesty’s Mails on board the said Vessels respect¬ 
ively as hereinafter mentioned 

I hat one of such Vessels so approved of and equipped and manned as afdresaid 
®hall within twenty-four hours after the Mails from England have been put onboard 
twice in every calendar month put to sea from Panama and proceed to Callao where 
the said Vessel is to arrive under ordinary circumstances and after calling at the in¬ 
termediate ports within 300 hours after the time of departure from Panama but 
should the Mails from England not arrive at Panama at the time appointed or here¬ 
after to be appointed for their arrival the said Vessel is to remain there 120 hours 
from the time so appointed before proceeding to sea That one of such Vessels so 
approved of and equipped and manned as aforesaid and with Her Majesty’s Mails 
on Board shall twice in every calender month and within 444 hours from the time of 
the departure of the said Vessel from Panama put to sea from Callao and proceed to 
Valparaiso where the said Vessel is to arrive under ordinary circumstances and after 
calling at the intermediate ports within 300 hours after the time of departure from 
Callao. 

That one of such Vessels so approved of and equipped and manned as aforesaid 
and with Her Majesty’s Mails on board shall within 800 Hours from the time ar¬ 
ranged for the departure of said Vessel from Panama twice in every calendar month 
put to sea from Valparaiso and proceed to Callao where the said Vessel is to arrive- 
under ordinary circumstances and after calling at the intermediate ports within 276 
hours after the time of departure from Valparaiso « 

That one of such vessels so approved of and equipped and manned as aforesaid and 
with Her Majesty’s Mails on board shall within 1100 hours from the time arranged 
for the departure of the said Vessel from Panama twice in every calender month 
put to sea from Callao and proceed to Panama where the said Vessel is to arrive un¬ 
der ordinary circumstances and after calling at the intermediate ports within 276 
hours after the time of departure from Callao 

That should it be deemed by the said Commissioners or by any of their authorized 
Agents requisite for the Public Service that any Vessel employed under this Contract 
should delay her departure from any of the Places herein mentioned beyond the pe¬ 
riods hereinbefore agreed upon the said Commissioners or the Naval Commauder-in- 
Cliief for the time being in the Pacific shall have power and be at liberty to order 
such delay not however exceeding twenty-four hours by letter addressed to the 
Master of any such Vessel or person acting as such and which shall be deemed a 
sufficient authority for such detention Provided always nevertheless that the power 
so delegated to the said Naval Commander-in-Chief shall only be exercised by him un¬ 
der circumstances of extreme urgency or necessity and the nature of which circum¬ 
stances shall in every case be forthwith specially reported by him to the said Com¬ 
missioners. 

That the said Company shall and will from time to time and at all times during 
the continuance of this Contract make such alterations or improvements in the 
construction equipments and machinery of the Vessels which shall be used in the 
performance of this Contract as the advanced state of science may suggest and the 
said Commissioners may direct 

That the said Company shall if required receive and allow to remain on board 
each of said Vessels so to be and while employed in the performance of this Con¬ 
tract an Officer of Her Majesty’s Navy or any other person to be severally appointed 
by the said Commissioners to take charge of the said Mails and also a servant of the 
said Officer or person if required and that every such Officer or person shall be rec¬ 
ognized and considered by the said Company aud their Officers and Agents and Sea¬ 
men as the Agent of said Commissioners in charge of Her Majesty’s Mails and as hav¬ 
ing full authority in all cases to require a due and strict execution of this Contract 
on the part of the said Company their Officers Servants and Agents and to deter¬ 
mine every question whenever arising relative to proceeding to sea or putting 
into harbour or to the necessity of stopping to assist any Vessel in distress or to- 
save human life and that the decision of such Officer or person as aforesaid shall in 
each and every such case he final and binding on the said Company unless the said 
Commissioners on appeal by the said Company shall think proper to decide otherwise 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


1.-8 


blit it is understood that the above expression “ to determine every question ” shall 
not confer upon such Otticer or person the power of compulsion in such cases 

That a suitable Berth with appropriate bed bedding and furniture shall at the 
cost of the said Company he provided and appropriated by them for and to the ex¬ 
clusive use and for the sole accommodation of such Agent ot the said Commissioners 
and also a proper and convenient place of deposit on board with secure lock and 
key for Her Majesty’s Mails and that each and every of the said Agents shall be vic¬ 
tualled by the said Company as a Chief Cabin passenger without any charge being 
made for the same and that should all or any of such Agents require a servant such 
servant shall also be provided with a proper and suitable berth and be duly vic¬ 
tualled whilst on board by and at the cost of the said Company without any charge 
being made for the same and should the said Commissioners deem it expedient to place 
the said Mails and Dispatches in charge of the Master or Commander of the Steam 
YesseTthe said Master or Commander shall and will make the usual Post-office Decla¬ 
ration and furnish such general returns and information and perform such services 
as the said Commissioners or their Agent may require 

That Her Majesty’s Mails shall be conveyed in the said Vessels and be delivered 
and received at each of the places to which the said Vessels are to proceed in the 
performance of this Contract and that at each port or place where the said Mails are 
to be delivered and received the agent having charge of Her Majesty’s Mails shall 
whenever and as often as by him deemed practicable or necessary be conveyed 
on shore and also from the shore to the Vessel employed for the time being in the 
performance of this Contract together with or (if such Agent consider requisite for 
the purposes of this Contract) without Her Majesty’s Mails in a suitable boat to be 
provided and properly manned and equipped by the said Company and that the 
directions of such Agent shall in all cases be obeyed as to the mode time and place 
of receiving and delivering Her Majesty’s Mails. 

That if any Vessel employed in the performance of this Contract having Her Maj¬ 
esty’s Mails on board shall stop linger or deviate from the direct course on her voy¬ 
age except from stress of weather accidents or when authorized as aforesaid or 
shall delay starting at the proper time or shall put back into port after starting 
without the sanction in each and every case of the Agent authorized to have the 
charge of the said Mails or when so sanctioned to put back into port shall not again 
start and proceed direct in the performance of the service hereby contracted for when 
and so soon as required by the said Agent then and in every such cases and as often 
as the same shall happen the said Company shall and will forfeit and pay unto Her 
Majesty Her heirs and successors the sum of 5007. and also the further sum of 5007. 
for every successive period of 12 hours which shall elapse until such vessel shall pro¬ 
ceed direct on her voyage in the performance of this Contract But the said Com¬ 
pany are not to be liable to any penalties under this Contract from any matters aris¬ 
ing from circumstances over which they and their servants had not and could not 
have had any control and which shall be so proved to the satisfaction of the said 
Commissioners 

That every agent authorized to have the charge of the said mails shall either alone 
or with such other persons as he may consider necessary have full power and author¬ 
ity as often as he may deem it requisite to examine and survey in such manner aud 
with the assistance of such persons as he may think proper any of the Vessels em¬ 
ployed or to be employed in the performance of this Contract and the hulls ma¬ 
chinery equipments and crews thereof on his giving reasonable notice in writing to 
tin; Master for the time being of the Vessel about to be examined or to the person 
acting as such of such his intention and if any defector deficiency be ascertained and 
notice thereof in writing be given to such master or person the said master shall im¬ 
mediately or as soon as possible thereupon remedy replace or effectively repair or 
make good every such defect or deficiency. 

And that the said Commissioners shall also have full power whenever and as often 
as they may deem it requisite to survey by any other of their Officers or Agents all 
and every the Vessels employed and to be employed in the performance of this Con¬ 
tract and the hulls thereof and the engines machinery furniture tackle apparel 
stores and equipments of every such Vessel the said Vessels to be opened in their 
hulls whenever the said Officers may require and if any such Vessel or any part 
thereof or any engines machinery furniture tackle apparel boats stores or equipments 
shall on any such survey be declared by any of such Officers or Agents unsea worthy 
or not adapted to the service hereby contracted to be performed or if the said Com¬ 
missioners shall deem it necessary or expedient that any alteration or improvement 
shall be made therein or any part thereof in order to keep pace with the more ad¬ 
vanced state of science every Vessel which shall be disapproved of or in which such 
defect or deficiency or want of improvement shall appear shall be deemed inefficient 
tor any service hereby contracted to be performed and shall not be employed again 
in the conveyance of Her Majesty’s Mails until such defect or deticiency shall have 
been repaired or supplied or the alterations or improvements as the case may be 
shall have been made to the satisfaction of the said Commissioners 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


139 


That the said Company and all commanding and other Officers of the Vessels to be 
employed in the performance of this Contract and all Agents Seamen and Servants 
ot the said Company shall at all times during the continuance of this Contract punc¬ 
tually attend to the orders and directions of the said Commissioners or of any of their 
, Officers or Agents as to the landing delivering and receiving Her Majesty’s Mails 

That the said Company shall and will when and as often as in writing they or the 
Masters of their respective vessels shall be required so to do by the said Commission¬ 
ers or by any Naval or other Officer or Agent acting under their authority (such writ¬ 
ing to specify the rank or description of the person or persons to be conveyed and 
the accommodation to be provided for him or them) receive provide for victual and 
convey on board each and every of or aiiy the Vessels to be employed in the perform¬ 
ance of this Contract for the whole or any portion of the voyages of the said Vessels 
(in addition to the Naval Office;- or other person authorized to have the charge of the 
said mails) any Naval Military and Civil Officers in the service of Her Majesty not 
exceeding four with their wives and families as Chief Cabin passengers and any 
number of Seamen Marines and Soldiers in Her Majesty’s Service not exceeding eight 
with their wives and families as Deck passengers to be effectually protected from 
sun rain and bad weather charging for such Chief Cabin and Deck passengers two- 
thirds only of the fares or rates charged by the said Company for ordinary passengers 
of a similar description not less than forty-eight hours’ notice being given to the 
Agent pf the said Company at the port of embarkation 

And that all and every the sums of money hereby stipulated to be forfeited and 
paid by the said Company unto Her Majesty her heirs and successors shall be con¬ 
sidered as stipulated or ascertained damages and shall and may be deducted and re¬ 
tained by the said Commissioners out of any moneys payable or which may thereafter 
be payable to the said Company or the payment may be enforced as a debt due to 
Her Majesty with full costs of suit at the discretion of the said Commissioners 

That the said Company shall and will receive on board each and every of the Ves¬ 
sels employed in the performance of this contract any number of small packages con¬ 
taining astronomical instruments charts medicines wearing apparel or other arti¬ 
cles addressed to persons in Her Majesty’s Service and convey and deliver the same 
to from and between all or any of the said ports or places to or from which the 
said Mails are to be conveyed in the performance of this Contract when and as ofeen 
as directed by the British Naval Officer in command at any port where the Vessel may 
touch or by Her Majesty’s Cliargb d’Affaires or Consuls in the countries to which such 
ports belong free from all costs and charges and also shall and will receive on board 
each and every of the said Vessels and convey and deliver to from and between 
all or any of the said ports or places any Navalor other stores not exceeding five tons 
in weight at any one time in any one Vessel at the rate of freight charged by the said 
Company for private goods 

And that the said Company shall in all cases be strictly responsible for the due cus¬ 
tody and safe delivery of the said packages articles and stores provided always 
that the said obligation to receive such passengers and stores shall not be binding on 
the said Company under any circumstances which would endanger or render liable 
the confiscation or forfeiture of any privileges exclusively granted to the said Com¬ 
pany by any of the South American States 

That if a t any time during the continuance of this Contract the said Commissioners 
shall deem it requisite to alter the particular days and hours ot departure appointed 
for the departure of the said Vessels from any of the places which the said Vessels are 
to leave they shall be at liberty at any time or times or from time to time to alter 
the days and hours of departure on giving a notice in writing of not less than six 
calendar months of such their intention to the said Company provided that any such 
alteration in the time of departure shall not be such as to prevent the service from 
being performed by six Vessels 

And it is hereby agreed and declared t hat this Contract shall commence on the first 
day of April One Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty-two or on such earlier day as 
b may be mutually agreed on and shall continue in force for seven years and then de¬ 
termine if the said Commissioners shall by writing under the hand ot the Secretary 
of the Admiralty for the time being have given to the said Company or the said Com¬ 
pany shall have given to the said Commissioners twelve calendar months’ notice in 
writing that this Contract shall so determine but if neither the said Commissioners 
nor the said Company shall give any such notice this Contract shall continue in force 
even after the said term of seven years until the expiration ot twelve calendar 
months’ notice in writing as aforesaid shall be given at any period of the year by 
either of the parties hereto to the other of them 

And in consideration of the due and faithful performance by the said Company ot 
all the services hereby contracted by them to be performed the said Commissioners 
do hereby agree that there shall be paid to the said Company so long as they perform 
the whole of the said services by bills at sight payable by Her Majesty’s Paymaster- 
General a sum after the rate of Twenty-five Thousand Pounds per annum in equal 
quarterly payments the first of such quarterly payments to become due and be made 


140 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


on the first day of July One Thousand Eight hundred and Fifty-two or at the expira¬ 
tion of three calendar months from such other day .as may be appointed for the com¬ 
mencement of this Contract 

And it is hereby further agreed and provided that without the consent of the said 
Commissioners signified in writing under the hand of one ot their Secretaries 
neither this Contract nor any part thereof shall be assigned underlet or disposed ot 
and that in case of the same or any part thereof being assigned underlet or other¬ 
wise disposed of without such consent signified as aforesaid or of any Breach of this 
Contract on the part of the said Company their officers agents or servants it shall be 
lawful for the said Commissioners for executing the said Office of Lord High Admiral 
(if they think tit and notwithstanding there may or may not have been any former 
breach of this contract) by writing under the hand of one of their Secretaries for the 
time being to determine this Contract without any previous notice to the said Com¬ 
pany or their agents nor shall the said Company oe entitled to any compensation in 
consequence of such determination but even if this Contract be so determined the 
payment of the sum of money hereinafter agreed to be made shall be enforced should 
the same be not duly paid by the said Company. 

And it is also agr« ed that the notices or directions which the said Commissioners or 
their Secretary Officers or other persons are hereby authorized and empowered to 
give to the said Company or to their or any of their Officers Agents or Servants may 
at the option of such Commissioners or their Secretary Officers or other persons be 
either delivered to the Secretary of the said Company or to the Master of any of the 
said Vessels or other Officer Agent or Servant of the said Company in the charge or 
management of any Vessel employed in the performance of this Contract or may be 
lefr. at the last known office or house of business of the said Company in England 
And it is hereby agreed that the Contract bearing date on or about the Twenty- 
ninth day of August One Thousand Eight Hundred and Forty-five and made between 
the said Company of the one part and the Commissioners for executing the Office of 
Lord High Admiral on behalf of Her Majesty of the other part shall be deemed and be 
considered to remain in force until the said First day of April One Thousand Eight hun¬ 
dred and Fifty-two or until such earlier day only as may be mutually agreed on for 
the commencement of the services hereby contracted to be performed from and after 
which day the same is hereby terminated and annulled 
And lastly for the due and faithful performance of all and singular the covenants, 
conditions provisoes clauses articles and agreements hereinbefore contained which 
on the part and behalf of the said Company are or ought to be observed performed 
fulfilled and kept the said Company do hereby bind themselves and their successors, 
unto our Sovereign Lady the Queen in the sum of Three Thousand and Five Hundred 
Pounds of lawful money of the United Kingdom to be paid to our said Lady the Queen 
Her heirs and successors by way of stipulated or ascertained damages hereby agreed 
upon between the same Commissioners and the said Company in case of the failure 
on the part of the said Company in the due execution of this Contract or any part 
thereof 

In witness whereof the said Company have hereunto set their corporate seal and 
two of the Commissioners for executing the Office of Lord High Admiral have here¬ 
unto set their hands and seals the day and year first above written 
The corporate seal of the above-named “Pacific Steam Navigation Company” was. 
hereunto affixed by order of the court of directors in the presence of 
[l. s.] Thomas Bkvis 

Commissioner 

WILLIAM TAGGART Secretary 
HOUSTON STEWART [l. s.l 
WILLIAM COWPER [l. s.} 

Signed sealed and delivered by the said Commissioners in the presence of 
Jno Doutty. 

Articles of Agreement made the Kith day of November 1850 between “the Pacific 
Steam Navigation Company” of the one part and the Commissioners for executing 
the'Office of Lord High Admiral of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire¬ 
land (for and on behalf of Her Majesty) of the other part 

Whereas by Articles of Agreement bearing date on or about the 23d day of Septem¬ 
ber 1850 and made or expressed to be made between the said Company of the one- 
part and the said Commissioners (for and on behalf of Her Majesty) of the other part 
the said Company did tor and in consideration of certain payments to be made to the 
said Company contract and agree to convey Her Majesty’s Mails as therein mentioned 
And it was thereby agreed and declared that su-di Contract should commence on the 
first day of April 1852 or on such earlier day as might be mutually agreed on and 
should continue in force for Seven Yearn and then determine if the said Commissioners 
should by writing under the hand of the Secretary of the Admiralty for the time be¬ 
ing have given to the said Company or the said Companv shall have given to the 


AMERICAN SHIFPING INTERESTS. 


141 


said Commissioners Twelve CalendarJMonths’ notice in writing that the said Contract 
should so determine but if neither the said Commissioners nor the said Company should 
give any such notice the said Contract should continue in force even after the said term 
of Seven Years until the expiration of a Twelve Calendar Months’ notice in writing 
as aforesaid should be given at any period of the year by either of the parties thereto 
to the other of them And whereas the said parties hereto have agreed that the said 
Contract shall not be determinable by either of them by any notice at the expiration 
of Seven Years from the commencement thereof but that such Contract shall continue 
as hereinafter mentioned Now these presents witness and it is hereby agreed by 
and between the parties hereto that the hereinbefore recited Contract of the Twenty- 
third day of September 1850 shall commence on the First day of April 1852 or on 
such earlier day as may be mutually agreed on and shall continue in force for Seven 
Years and thenceforward until the expiration of a Twelve Calendar Months’ written 
notice to be given at the expi ration of the said term of Seven Years or at any time after - 
wardsto the said Company by the said Commissioners by writing under the hand of 
the Secretary of the Admiralty for the time being or to the said Commissioners by the 
said Company and at the expiration of any such notice which may terminate at any 
period of the Year the said Contract shall ease provided always and it is hereby 
agreed that nothing herein contained shall prejudice or affect the power of the said 
Commissioners given or reserved to them in and by the said Articles of Agreement to 
determine the said Contract at anytime without any previous notice to the said Com¬ 
pany or their Agents in case the said Contract or any part thereof being without the 
consent of the said Commissioners assigned underlet or otherwise disposed of bv the 
said Company or in case of any Breach of the said Contract on the part of the said 
Company their Officers Agents or Servants 

In witness whereof the said Company have hereunto set their Corporate Seal and two 
of the said Commissioners for executing the Office of Lord High Admiral have here¬ 
unto set their Hands and Seals the day and year first above-written. 

The Corporate Seal of the above-named “ Pacific Steam Navigation Company” was 
hereunto affixed by order of the Court of Directors in the presence of 
[l. s.] Thomas Bevis, Com. 

WILLIAM TAGGART, Sec. 

ALEX. MILNE [l. s.] 

WILLIAM COWPER [l. s.J 

Signed Sealed and delivered by the said Commissioners in the presence of 
Jno. James. 

Table showing the sailings of the Pacific Steam Navigation Company's Contract Packets , 

Twice a Month. 


f Approved 4th February 1852, see. Letter from Company, 

1852.1 


21st January, and Post-Office, 3d February 


Places. 


Panama. 

Buenaventura. 

Paita. 

Callao. 

Pisco . 

Islay. 

Arica. 

Iquique. 

Cobija. 

Caldera. 

Huasco. 

Coquimbo. 

Valparaiso. *. ■ 

Coquimbo. 

Huasco. 

Caldera. 

Cobija. 

Iquique. 

Arica. 

Islay. 

Pisco. 

Callao. 

Paita . 

Buenaventura.' 

Panama. 


Dates. 

Dates. 

.3 ) 

© 05 

O © 

© 

Steam. 

ing. 

Stop¬ 

pages. 


m 

. 

g 







1 3 


| 

Eh 

3 

>> 

§ 

Arrival. 

Departure. 

Arrival. 

Departure. 

s 


08 

p 1 

o 

w 

a 

« 

& 


9 HOOD 


24, noon. 


9 

.... 




11 , 

3 a. m.. 

11, 4 a. m. 

26, 

3 a. m.. 

26, 4 a. m. 

352 


i ! 

15 



14. 

4 “ 

14, 4 p. m. 

29, 

4 “ 

29, 4 p. m. 

635 

.... 

3 



1 ! 

16, midnight. 

19, 4 a. m. 

1 , midnight.. 

4, 4 a. m. 

508 

.... 

2 

8 

2 


19, 

5 p. m.. 

19, 6 p. m. 

4, 

5 p. m.. 

“ 6 p. m. 

116 



13 



21 , 

8 a. m.. 

21,11 a. m 

6 , 

8 a. m.. 

6 l 11 1 - m 

339 

.... 

i 

14 



tl 

2 “ 

22, 7 “ 

l t 

2 “ 

7, 7 a. m 

136 



15 



22 , 

7 p. m.. 

“ 8 p. m. 

7, 

7 p.m.. 

“ 8 p. m. 

106 



12 



23, 

noon.. 

23, 2 “ 

8 , 

noon.. 

8 2 p.m. 

144 



16 



24, 

9 p. m.. 

25, 9 a. m 

9, 

9 p. m.. 

10, 9 am. 

278 

.... 

i 

7 


1 

25, 

7 “ 

“ 8 p. m 

10 , 

7 “ 

“ 8 p. m. 

94 



10 



26, 

7 a. m.. 

26, 9 a. m. 

11 , 

7 a. m.. 

11, 9 a. m. 

94 


.... 

11 



27, 

7 “ 

1 , 1 p. m 

12 , 

7 “ 

16, 1 p. m. 

195 



22 

4 


2 , 

11 “ 

2 , 2 “ 

17, 

11 “ 

17, 2 p. m. 

195 



22 



3, 

1 “ 

3, 2, a. m. 

18, 

1 “ . 

18, 2 a. m. 

98 



11 




noon.. 

“ 6 p. m. 

“ 

noon.. 

“ 6 p. m. 

94 



10 



5, 

1 a. m.. 

5, 2 a. m. 

20 , 

la. m.. 

20 , 2 a. m 

| 278 

- - - - 

i 

7 



6 p. m.. 

“ 7 p. m. 

“ 

6 p. m.. 

“ 7 p. m. 

144 



16 



6 , 

7 a.m.. 

6 , 10 a. m 

21 , 

7 a. m.. 

21,10 a. m. 

106 



12 



7. 

1 “ 

7, 3 “ 

22 , 

1 “ 

22, 3 “ 

136 



15 



8 , 

5 p. m. - 

8 , 7 p. m.. 

23, 

5 p. m.. 

23, 7 p. m 

339 

.... 

i 

14 



9, 

8 a. m.. 

11 , noon. 

24, 

8 a. m . 

26, noon. 

116 



13 

2 


13, 

8 p. m.. 

14. 8 p. m. 

28, 

8 p. m.. 

29, 8 p. m. 

508 

.... 

2 

8 

1 


17, 

i n 

o t t 

17, 9 “ 

9 

Q lt 

2, 9 “ 

635 


3 




8 

A| 

4 ? 

o 

noon. 

352 


1 

15 



iy, 

noon . 











tO LC WHK C- r- 4 CO Ci CO 














































































142 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Working of the Line with Four Steamers. 



Leaves Panama. 

Arrives at Valparaiso. 

Leaves Valparaiso. 

Arrives at Panama. 

No. 1. 

April 9th. 

April 27th. 

May 1st. 

May 19tli. 

June 4th. 

June 19th. 

July 4tli. 

No. 2. 

No. 3. 

No. 1_ 

April 24th. 

May 9th. 

Mav 24tli. 

May 12th . 

May 27th . 

June 12th. 

May 16th. 

June 1st. 

June 16th. 

No. 4. 

Spare Vessel. 


. 



(Indorsed:) Royal Mail Steam Packets. A return of any existing Contracts be¬ 
tween the Government and the Royal Mail Company and Pacihc Steam Navigation 
Company respectively; specifying the Length or Number of Mile§ of the respective 
Voyages; the Number of Ports required to be called at on each Voyage; the Speed, 
if any, stipulated; and the Amount of Annual Grant to each Company. (Mr. Card- 
well.) Ordered, by The House of Commons, to be Printed, 7 May 1852. 


CONTRACT. PEN INS ULAR A ND ORIENTAL STEA M NA VIO A TION COMPANY 

Dated 8th of July, 1874 (see page 1). 

Run between England and East India, China, and Japan. 

Term of contract shall commence on the 15th day of August, 1874, and shall continue 
in force until the 1st day of February, 1880, and determine after a 24 months’ notice 
by either party (see page 9). 

Signed by John James Robert Manners, Postmaster General. 

Payment to the company of a subsidy of £450,000 (£2,150,000) per annum (see page 8). 
Admiralty have power to purchase or charter all or any of the vessels (see page. 9). 

POST OFFICE (EAST INDIA, CHINA, AND JAPAN MAILS CONTRACT). 

Return to an Order of the Honourable the House of Commons, dated 16 July, 1874; for copy 
u of a contract dated the 8th day of July, 1874, between the Postmaster General and 
the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company for the conveyance of the East 
India, China, and Japan mails, together with copy of a treasury Minute, dated the 14 th 
day of July 1874, thereon .” 

Treasury Chambers, 16 July 1874. W. H. Smith. 

Peninsular and Oriental Company.—Contract of 8th July 1874. 

EAST INDIA CHINA AND JAPAN MAILS. 

Articles of Agreement made this 8th day of July 1874 between the Right Honour¬ 
able John James Robert Manners (commonly calied Lord John Manners) Her Maj¬ 
esty’s Postmaster General for the time being on behalf of Her Majesty of the one 
part and the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company of the other part 
witness that the Company for themselves their successors and assigns hereby cove¬ 
nant with the Postmaster General his executors administrators successors and as¬ 
signs Her Majesty’s Postmaster General for the time being in manner following (that 
is to say) :— 

1. For all purposes of these presents the term “ mails” shall be understood to com¬ 
prehend all boxes bags or packets of letters newspapers books or printed papers and 
all other articles which under the existing regulations of the Post Office are trans¬ 
missible by the post without regard either to the place to which they may be ad¬ 
dressed or to that in which they may have originated and all empty bags empty 
boxes and other sfores aud articles used or to be used in carrying on the Post Office 
service which shall be sent by or to or from the Post Office. 

2. If at any time the Postmaster General shall desire to modify the existing regu¬ 
lations as to articles transmissable by the post either by prohibiting the transmission 
by the post of the articles which are now transmissible thereby or by authorising 
the transmission by the post of articles which are not now transmissible thereby lie 































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


143 

shall be at liberty so to do on giving reasonable notice to the company and in case 
the effect of such modification shall be to diminish the burden of the services herein¬ 
after agreed to be performed a deduction shall be made from the annual subsidy 
hereinafter stipulated to be paid to the company and in case the effect of such modi¬ 
fication shall be to increase the burden of the services hereinafter agreed to be per¬ 
formed an addition shall be made to such subsidy and the amount of such deduction 
or addition as the case may be shall be settled by agreement between the Postmaster 
General and the Company or failing agreement by arbitration in manner hereinafter 
provided. 

3. The Company will at all times during tire continuance of this Agreement or so 
long as the whole or any part of the services hereby agreed to be performed ought to 
be performed in pursuance thereof provide keep seaworthy and in complete repair 
and readiness for the purpose of conveying as hereinafter provided all Her Majesty’s 
mails which shall at any time and from time to time by the Postmaster General or 
any of his officers or agents be required to be conveyed as hereinafter provided on all 
the routes specified in the first Schedule hereunder written a sufficient number of 
good substantial and efficient steam vessels of adequate power and speed and supplied 
with first rate appropriate steam engines and in all respects suited to the perform¬ 
ance of the services herein agreed to be performed within the respective times herein 
stipulated. 

4. The vessels to be provided under this Agreement shall be always furnished with 
all necessary and proper tackle stores oil tallow fuel provisions machinery engines 
anchors cables boats fire-pumps and all other proper and requisite means for extin¬ 
guishing fire lightning-conductors charts chronometers proper nautical instruments 
and all other furniture and apparel and whatsoever else may be requisite and neces¬ 
sary for equipping the said vessels and rendering them constantly efficient for the 
said services and manned with competent officers with appropriate certificates granted 
pursuant to the Act 17 & 18 Viet. c. 104, or to the Act or Acts in force for the time 
beiug relative to the granting certificates to officers in the Merchant Service and also 
with competent engineers and a sufficient crew of able seamen and other men and 
with a competent surgeon to be subject to the approval of the Postmaster General. 

5. The Company shall land and embark the mails at Bombay by means of a'small 
steam vessel and accordingly the Company shall in addition to the vessels hereinbe¬ 
fore mentioned provide a small steamer which shall be kept at Bombay in complete 
repair and ready for landing andvembarking the mails. And also in addition to the 
vessels hereinbefore mentioned the Company shall provide and maintain in complete 
repair an efficient tug steamer which shall be kept in the Suez Canal for the pur¬ 
pose of assisting the other vessels of the Company in speedily and safe! y passing through 
the said canal in the performance of the services herein agreed to be performed. 

6. If Her Majesty’s Postmaster General shall consider any of the Company’s vessels 
unfit for the conveyance of mails he may by writing under his hand or under the 
hand of the Secretary or one of the Assistant Secretaries of the Post Office require the 
said Company to show cause why such vessel should not be withdrawn from the serv¬ 
ice |ind unless within six weeks after such requisition the said Company shall show 
cause to the contrary to the satisfaction of the said Postmaster General he may at any 
time after the expiration of the said period of six weeks by writing under his hand or 
under the hand of the Secretary or one of the Assistant Secretaries of the Post Office 
declare such vessel to be unfit for the conveyance of mails and after such declaration 
shall have been made it shall not be lawful for the said Company to employ such 
vessel in the performance of this contract. And in order to determine whether the 
said Postmaster General shall be justified in declaring any vessel unfit for the con¬ 
veyance of mails or whether the said Company shall be able to show cause to the con¬ 
trary a special examination shall be made of the hull and machinery of any such 
vessel by such person or persons as may be selected for that purpose by the Postmas¬ 
ter General. 

7. The equipments officers engineers and crew of each vessel when such vessel is in 
any British port shall be subject at all times to the inspection of the said Postmaster 
General or of such other person or persons as he shall at any time or times authorise 
to make such inspection. 

8. The Company shall convey the said mails from Brindisi to Bombay in 422 hours 
and Irom Bombay to Brindisi in 425 hours and from Brindisi to Point do Galle in 472 
hours and from Point de Galle to Brindisi in 488 hours and from Brindisi to Shanghai 
in 965 hours and from Bombay to Southampton in 666 hours and from Point de Galle 
to Southampton in 730 hours and from Brindisi to Calcutta in 646 hours and from 
Hong Kong to Yokohama in 170 hours and from Yokohama to Hong Kong in 170 hours 
and each of the periods of hours hereinbefore specified is to be reckoned as inclusive 
of stoppages for the purpose of the delivery and reception of the mails. And the ar¬ 
rangements for determining and recording the exact time of the arrival and departure 
of the vessels at and from the several places above named and the period of every 
delay which shall take place on any voyage shall be under the exclusive regulation 


144 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


of the Postmaster General whose decision upon all questions relating to those matters 
shall be final. 

9. One of the vessels to be provided under the 3rd Article of this Agreement shall 
on such days of the week and at such hours as the Postmaster General shall appoint 
and immediately after the mails are embarked put to sea from touch and arrive at 
the several ports or places respectively mentioned in the said first Schedule hereunder 
written and all such vessels shall convey the said mails as mentioned in such Sched¬ 
ule and all the stipulations matters and things therein contained shall form part of 
this Agreement and be observed and performed by the Company accordingly. And 
the Company shall convey in such vessels to and from and cause to be delivered and 
received at such of the ports or places mentioned in the said first Shedule from or at 
which the said vessels are to start touch and arrive in the performance of this Agree¬ 
ment all such mails as shall or may be tendered or delivered to or received by the 
Company or any of their agents officers or servants by or from the Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral or any of his officers or agents. 

10. Should it be deemed by the Postmaster General his officers or agents requisite 
for the public service that any such vessel to be emplo 3 r ed under this Agreement 
should at any time or times delay her departure from any port from which the mails 
■are to be conveyed under this Agreement beyond the period appointed for her depart¬ 
ure therefrom the Postmaster General his officers or agents shall have power to 
order such delay (not however exceeding 24 hours) by letter addressed by him or 
them to the master of any such vessel or person acting as such and which shall be 
deemed a sufficient authority for such detention. 

11. In the event of any vessel of the Company whilst passing through the Suez 
Canal on an outward voyage in the performance of any of the services hereby agreed 
to be performed becoming unable by reason of the stranding of such vessel in the said 
canal or of any other difficulty or obstruction incident to the navigation thereof to 
complete its passage through the said canal in due course the Company shall use 
their utmost endeavours to prevent any delay in the delivery of the mails and with 
that object shall employ in the subsequent conveyance of any mails on board such 
stranded or impeded vessel to their destination any other vessel belonging to the Com¬ 
pany which may be at Suez and available for the service. 

12. The Company shall land at Ismailiaall mails from Gibraltar or Malta for Alex¬ 
andria and shall embark at Ismailia all mails from Alexandria for Malta or Gibraltar 
and shall convey at the expense of the Company all such mails by despatch boat 
from Port Said to Ismailia and from Ismailia to Port Said whenever the employment 
of such means of conveyance shall be found more expeditious than landing the mails 
at Ismailia direct from the mail packet or embarking them at Ismailia on board the 
packet and shall repay to the Postmaster General and indemnify him from all ex¬ 
penses which may be incurred with the Egyptian Post Office in respect of the con¬ 
veyance of such mails between Ismailia and Alexandria in either direction. 

13. If at any time the Company shall desire to modify the services hereby agreed 
to be performed by substituting Plymouth or Liverpool for Southampton as one of 
the ports to and from which mails are to be conveyed under this Agreement they sjiall 
be at liberty so to do on giving three calendar months’ notice in writing of such their 
desire and in such case and from and after the time named for that purpose in such 
notice the services specified under the head route No. 1 in the first Schedule hereunder 
written shall no longer be performed and in lieu of such services there shall be sub- 
stiiuted the services specified in the second or third Schedule hereunder written as 
the case may be and except as herein otherwise expressly provided all the provisions 
of this Agreement shall thereafter apply to the last-mentioned services in the same 
manner in all respects as if the services specified in route No. 1 of the said first Sched¬ 
ule had been omitted therefrom and the services specified in the said second or third 
Schedule as the case may be had been inserted in the place thereof Provided always 
that, the amount of the consideration or subsidy to be paid to the Company as herein¬ 
after provided shall not be increased or diminished by reason of the substitution 
aforesaid And provided also that in the event of* the substitution aforesaid the 
periods of time within which the Company ought in obedience to this Agreement to 
convey the mails from Southampton to Bombay and from Bombay to Southampton 
respectively shall in case Plymouth be adopted be decreased in proportion to the 
diminished distance and in case Liverpool be adopted be increased in proportion to 
the increased distance. 

14. It at any time or times the Postmaster General shall desire to alter the parties 
Jar days times or hours of departure from and arrival at any of the ports or places to 
or from which Her Majesty’s mails are for the time being to be conveyed under this 
Agreement he shall be at liberty so to do on giving three calendar months’ notice in 
writing of such his desire to the Company provided such alterations do not necessi¬ 
tate an increase of speed. 

15. It at any time or times the Postmaster General shall desire otherwise to modify 
the services hereby agreed to be performed (as for example to increase or decrease 


AMERICAN ^HIPPING INTERESTS. 


145 


the frequency ot the conveyance of mails between any of the ports or places to or 
from which such mails are to be conveyed under this Agreemen t or to extend the 
conveyance of such mails to any other ports or places not specified in this Agreement 
or to discontinue the conveyance of such mails to or from any port or place specified 
in this Agreement) he shall be at liberty so to do on giving reasonable notice to the 
Company and on paying to them for such increased or extended services such further 
consideration and in the event of the services hereby agreed to be performed being 
reduced on his paying to them such reduced consideration as may in either of such 
cases be mutually agreed upon between the Company and the Postmaster General or 
failing such mutual Agreement by arbitration in the manner hereinafter provided. 

l(i. The particular days times and hours of departure from and arrival at any of 
such ports or places or other services (if any) which may be appointed by any altera¬ 
tion under the two preceding clauses or either of them shall for the time being be 
deemed to be the days times and hours of departure and arrival of mails and other 
services under this Agreement and shall be observed and kept by the Company accord¬ 
ingly. 

17. If on any outward voyage commencing at Brindisi the Company shall fail to 
deliver Mer Majesty’s mails at any port of destination whether the same be Bombay 
Point de Galle or Shanghai for 12 hours or more after the time at which the same 
ought to be delivered according to the provisions of this Contract which shall for the 
time being be in force then and in every such case the Company shall forfeit and pay 
to Her Majesty her heirs and successors the sum of 100 I. for every complete period of 
12 hours during which the delivery of such mails shall be delayed beyond the time at 
which the same ought to be delivered as aforesaid Provided always that the pay¬ 
ment of any such penalty as aforesaid shall not be enforced against the Company if 
it be shown by them to the satisfaction of the Postmaster General that the delay has 
arisen from damage to the vessel or the machinery thereof. 

18. If on any homeward voyage from Bombay or Point de Galle to Southampton 
the Company shall fail to deliver Her Majesty’s mails at Southampton for 12 hours 
or more after the time at which the same ought to be delivered according to the pro- 
visions of this Contract which shall for the time being be in force then and in every 
such case the Company shall forfeit and pay to Her Majesty her heirs and successors 
the sum of 100 l. for every complete period of 12 hours during which the delivery of 
such mails shall be delayed beyond the time at which the same ought to be delivered 
as aforesaid Provided always that the payment of any such penalty as aforesaid 
shall not be enforced against the Company if it be shown by them to the satisfaction 
of the Postmaster General that the delay has arisen from damage to the vessel or the 
machinery thereof. 

19. If on any homeward voyage from Bombay or Point de Galle to Brindisi the 
Company shall fail to deliver Her Majesty’s mails at Brindisi for 12 hours or more 
after the time at which the same ought to be delivered according to the provisions of 
this Contract which shall for the time being be in force then and in every such case 
the company shall forfeit and pay to Her Majesty her heirs and successors the sum of 
50 l. for every complete period of 12 hours during which the delivery of such mails 
shall be delayed beyond the time at which the same ought to be delivered as afore¬ 
said Provided always that the payment of any such penalty as aforesaid shall not 
lie enforced against the Company if it be shown by them to the satisfaction of the 
Postmaster General that the delay has arisen from causes over which they the Com¬ 
pany had not and could not have had any control. 

20. If in any case not hereinbefore provided for the Company shall fail to deliver 
Her Majesty’s mails at any port at which the same ought to be delivered in pursuance 
of this Contract for 24 hours or more after the time at which the same ought to be 
delivered according to the provisions of this Contract which shall for the time being 
be in force then and in every such case the Company shall forfeit and pay to Her 
Majesty her heirs and successors the sum of 50 l. for every complete period of 24 hours 
during which the delivery of such mails shall lie delayed beyond the time at which the 
same ought to be delivered as aforesaid Provided always that the payment of any such 
penalty as aforesaid shall not be enforced against the Company if it be shown by them 
to the satisfaction of the Postmaster General that the delay has arisen from causes over 
which they the Company had not and could not have had any control. 

21. Provided always and it is hereby declared that during the prevalence of the 
south-west monsoon 96 additional hours shall be allowed for the voyages from Bombay 
to Southampton from Bombay to Brindisi or from Calcutta to Suez and from Shang¬ 
hai to Bombay and during the prevalence of the north-east monsoon 96 additional 
hours shall be allowed for the voyage from Bombay to Shanghai and 24 additional 
hours shall be allowed for the voyage from Hong Kong to Yokohama. 

22. If the Company fail to provide an efficient vessel at any of the several ports or 
places at which such vessel ought to be provided in accordance with the terms of this 
Agreement ready to put to sea on and at the appointed day and hour then and so 
often as the same shall happen the Company shall forfeit and pay unto Her Majesty her 

007-10 



146 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


beirs and successors the sum of 500 l. aud also the further sum of 100 l. for every success¬ 
ive 24 hours which shall elapse until such vessel actually proceeds to sea on hei voyage 
in pursuance of this Agreement provided always that the total amount of the penalties 
last aforesaid shall not in the aggregate exceed the part of the subsidy of 430,000 t. 
hereinafter made payable to the Company which shall be applicable to the voyage in 
respect of which default shall have been made by a sum greater than the sum of 
1,000 l. 

23. The company shall whenever required by the Postmaster General so to do re¬ 
ceive and allow to remain on board of each of the said vessels while employed in the 
performance of this Agreement to the east of Suez and also while remaining at Suez 
or at any port or place east of Suez and whether such vessel shall be with or without 
mails on board an Officer in Her Majesty’s Navy to be appointed by the Postmaster 
General to take charge of the said mails and also a servant of such officer (if required) 
and every such officer shall be recognized and considered by the Company their 
officers agents and seamen as the agent of the Postmaster General in charge of mails 
and as having full authority in all cases to require a due and strict performance of 
this Agreement on the part of the Company their officers servants and agents and to 
determine (so far as relates to the levying of penalties) every question whenever aris¬ 
ing relative to proceeding to sea or putting into harbour or the necessity of stopping 
to assist any vessel in distress or to save human life and the decision of such officer 
as aforesaid shall in every such case be final and binding on the Company unless the 
Postmaster General on appeal by the Company thinks proper to decide otherwise pro¬ 
vided however that the yords “to determine every question” shall not confer upon 
such officer the power of control over the commander of the vessel conveying the said 
mails 

24. If the Postmaster General at any time or times thinks fit so to do he shall beat 
liberty to substitute for such naval officer a civil officer in the service of the Post 
Office to have charge of the said mails ami thereupon and in every case in which a 
civil officer shall be appointed to be in charge of mails such last-mentioned officer 
shall be received and be allowed to remain on board each of the said vessels as here¬ 
inbefore provided with respect to any such naval officer but w hen any civil officer iu 
the service of the Post Office shall be in charge of the said mails his duties shall be 
confined to the Post Office business. 

25. A suitable first-class cabin with appropriate bed bedding and furniture shall 
at the cost of the Company be provided and appropriated by them for the exclu¬ 
sive use and accommodation of every such naval or civil officer and every of the said 
officers shall be victualled by the Company as a chief cabin passenger without any 
charge either for his passage or victualling. 

26. The Company shall also receive and allow to remain on board each of the said 
vessels while employed in the performance of this agreement to the east of Suez and 
also while remaining at Suez or at any port or place east of Suez and whether such 
vessels shall be with or w ithout mails on board in addition to the officer in charge of 
the mails such a number of officers iu the service of the Post Office as shall be reason¬ 
ably required for the purpose of sorting and making up the mails conveyed or to be 
conveyed by such vessel and shall provide suitable accommodation and victualling 
for such additional officers either as chief cabin passengers .or as fore cabin passengers 
at the option of the said Postmaster General. 

27. The company shall at their own cost provide on each of the vessels to be em¬ 
ployed under this Agreement a separate aud convenient room for the convenient and 
secure deposit of the mails under lock aud key and shall also at the like cost (if and 
w'hen they shall be required so to do by the said Postmaster General) erect and pro¬ 
vide on each of such vessels employed under this Agreement to the east of Suez a sep¬ 
arate and convenient room for sorting and making up the said mails and shall pro¬ 
vide in such room all such furniture lamps fittings and other conveniences as shall be 
necessary or convenient for the purpose of sorting and making up the said mails and 
all such furniture lamps fittings and other conveniences shall be from time to time 
cleansed and kept in repair and the oil for the lamps supplied by the servants and at 
the cost of the Company and the services of the crew of every such vessel shall from 
time to time be given in the conveyance of the mails between the mail room and the 
sorting room. 

28. At each port or place where the said mails are to be delivered and received the 
officer having charge of the mails shall whenever and as often as by him shall be 
deemed necessary for the public service and either with or without liis assistant or 
servant be conveyed on shore and also from the shore to the vessel employed for the 
time being in the performance of this Agreement together with or (if such officer shall 
consider it necessary for the purposes of this Agreement so to do) without mails in a 
suitable and seaworthy boat of not less than four oars to be furnished with effectual 
covering for the mails aud properly provided manned and equipped by the Company. 

29. The Master or Commander of each of the said vessels employed in the perform¬ 
ance of this Agreement to the west of Suez and in all cases where the officer or other 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


147 


person appointed to have charge ot the mails shall he absent the Master or Commander 
of each of the said vessels employed in the performance of this Agreement to the east 
of Suez shall without any remuneration (other than the sum herein provided to be 
paid to the Company) take due care of and the Company shall be responsible for the 
receipt and delivery of the said mails and each of such masters or commanders shall 
make the usual declaration or declarations required or which may hereafter be re¬ 
quired by the Postmaster General in such and similar cases and furnish such journals 
returns and information to and perform such services as the Postmaster General or 
his agents may require and every such master or commander or officer duly author¬ 
ized by him having the charge of mails shall himself immediately on the arrival at 
any of the said ports or places of any such vessels deliver all mails for such port or 
place into the hands of the Postmaster or other person at such port or place whom 
the Postmaster General shall authorise to receive the same receiving in like manner 
all the return or other mails to be forwarded in due course. 

30. The Company shall not nor shall any of the masters of any of the vessels em¬ 
ployed or to be employed under this Agreement receive or permit to be received on 
board any of the vessels employed under this Agreement any letters for conveyance 
other thaii-those duly in charge of the said naval officer or other person authorised to 
have charge of the said mails or which are or may be privileged by law nor any mails 
for conveyance on behalf of any colony or foreign country, without the consent of the 
Postmaster General and in case of any such default respectively the Company shall 
be liable to be proceeded against for breach of this Agreement. 

31. The Company and all commanding and other officers o£ the vessels employed in 
the performance of this Agreement and all agents seamen and servants of the Com¬ 
pany shall at all times punctually attend to the orders and directions of the Post¬ 
master General his officers or agents as to the mode time and place of landing deliv¬ 
ering and receiving mails. 

3*2. The Company shall and will when and as often as in writing they or the masters 
of their respective vessels shall be required so to do by the said Postmaster General or 
by any naval or other officers or agents acting under his authority (such writing to 
specify the rank or description of the person or persons to be conveyed and the accom¬ 
modation to be provided for him or them) receive provide for victual and convey to 
and from and between any of the places to which any of the said vessels are to pro¬ 
ceed in the performance of this contract (in addition to the naval officer authorised to 
have charge of the said mails and to officers of the Post Office employed in connection 
with the mails couvejed by such vessel) any number of naval military and civil 
officers in the service of Pier Majesty not exceeding eight in any one ship with or 
without their wives and children as chief cabin or first class passengers and any 
number of non-commissioned and warrant officers not exceeding four in any one ship 
with or without their wives and children as fore cabin or second class passengers 
together with servants of both 1 chief and fore cabin passengers and any number of 
seamen marines soldiers or artificers in Her Majesty’s service not exceeding 10 in 
any one ship with or without their wives and children as deck or third-class passen¬ 
gers to be always provided with effectual protection from rain sun and bad weather 
and not exposed on deck without such competent shelter, and to have ha ve hammocks 
or bunks (subject to the approval of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty) 
placed between decks. 

33. The passengers who shall be conveyed in pursuance of the last preceding clause 
(who are hereinafter designated Government passengers) with their families shall bo 
treated in no respect whether as regards food cabin or other accommodation or aught 
else in a way inferior to that of ordinary passengers of the same class or that required 
by the Regulations of Her Majesty’s Transport Service. The messing of the first and 
second class Government passengers shall include in each day an imperial pint of 
good sound bottled or draught ale or beer and that of the first class in addition 
an imperial pint of good foreign wine either port or white. The several classes of 
nassengers shall mess in separate places and medical attendance medicine and med¬ 
ical comforts mess utensils and fittings cooking utensils articles for table use and 
mess places fuel lights requisite articles of bedding and all other necessaries shall 
be provided for them in like manner as for ordinary passengers of the like classes re¬ 
spectively. 

34. The passage money for Government passengers and their families respectively 
shall be the same as that charged by the Company for ordinary passengers of a similar 
kind and shall include all the particulars mentioned in the last preceding clause and 
whenever any alterations of rates for ordinary passengers may be made the Postmas¬ 
ter General and the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty shall be immediately ap¬ 
prised of such alterations. 

35. Returns of the embarkation and disembarkation of all Government passengers 
sha ll be furnished to the Director of Transport Services immediately after the depart¬ 
ure and arrival of each vessel. 

36. Payments for passage money for Government passengers shall be applied for by 


148 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTEREST-. 


invoices according to a form to be obtained from the office of the Director of Transport 
Services arid sha'.L be made nj*on the production to su- h Dir- for of the orders for the 
pinnijnrn together with a certificate nnder the hand of the commanding officer speci¬ 
fying the nnm the third class passengers (men women and children) conveyed 

wim the ag^- an.: '--xe- of the latter an<i st tin- t . - pe ri •:«'.> during which they have 
been respectively regularly sap.plied while on t-.ard ^ ith provi-i »ns and also of a 
certificate under th- hard of each first and second class passenger of his i<r her having 
been landed at th- pla* - of de-tination and of having >—n prop-rlv accommodated 
and messed during d-r voyage and sp- ifying th- dat-- from and to which they were 
so messed computed from the first to the last dinner meal. 

37. The Company shall convey for every Government pas-enger free of charge The 
same enantity of '•aggage wheth-r su- -L quantity -L *11 •- - slim a t.-d or ascertained 
by hulk or weigh* which a*-cording to th* r-gnlati -n- of the Company for the time 
being they •-oncer free of charge for an ordinary passenger of the same class and 
freight shall b ble for any extra baggage of a Government passenger after the 

- : * _ ' ■ ' • -. : •.. ' - • • . • _ . _ _ _ e 

of an ordinary passenger of the same class. 

The pas-3_- money for the wives and families of commissioned and civil oncers 
when not ordered to be conveyed at the public expense shall I paid to the Company 
by the officer* themselves. 

30. In all case* where an officer in the civil naval or military service of Her 
Majesty who may not be entitled to a passage a* the public expense shall ree-oire a 
passage on board «>ny of the vessei- employed in the performance of this contract the 
Company shall C- Vmnd when they Lave room to provide a pass ag e for such officer 
in preference to private passengers and shall charge n*» Ligb-r rate for -nc*h passage 
than is chargeable for an ordinary passenger. 

4' . I he Company shah receive on board each of the vessel- employed in the perform¬ 
ance of th:- contract and shall convey on behalf of the Lords Commissioners of the 
Admiralty any small packages which ma lered for conveyance and also (on re- 

■ eivitjg from thePostma-ter General or hi- officers or agent- or from the British naval 
officer in con:maud of the station two day-* previous notice -hall receive on board 
any naval or ot stores not exceeding 10 tons weight or 15 tons of 4" cubic feet 
each in measurement at any one time in any one vessel (packages and stores of a 
danger'* ,- or dan -ging nature excepted in accordance with the general regulations 
of the Company) and shall convey and deliver such small package- and -tores at the 
lowest rate of freight charged by the Company for private goods of a similar charac¬ 
ter or description and the Company shall give immediate notice to the Postmaster 
General and the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty of any alteration in such rate 
of freight and -hall in ad cases be responsible for the custody and safe and speedv 
delivery of such packages and stores. 

41. And in consideration of the due and faithful performance by the Company of 
all the services hereby contracted to be by them performed the Postmaster General 
doth hereby covenant that there shall be paid to the Company (out of such aids or 
-applies as may from time to time be provided and appropriated by Parliament for 
thaj purpose) so long as they perform the whole of such services in manner and with 
-uch vessels as hereinbefore respectively provided the sum of 430,000 1. per annum, 
by equal quarterly payments on the 1st day of January the 1st 'lav of April the 1st 
day of July and the 1st day of October in every year and so in proportion for anv 
less period than a quarter. * * 


U. On or a*, -con a- conveniently may be after the 1st dav of April and the 1st dav 
of October in every year during the continuance of this Agreement an account shall 
lfe made out of the amount payable by the Company to the Postmaster General on ac¬ 
count of penaltm- incurred by the Company and if it shall appear bv such account 
that any snrn is d e from the Company to tie Po-t master General the same -.hall be 
forthwith paid oy the Company to the Post ma-ter General or at his option maybe 
deducted from the next quarterly payment due to the Company. 

E:*.'-ept where otherwise expres-ly provided none of the services performed or 
to be performed by the Company under Thi- Contract shall entitle them to any re 
muneration beyond the said subsidy of 430,000 l. per annum and snch other sum or 
sums of money (if any) as are hereinbefore expressly made payable. 

And it is hereby further agreed and declared between and by the parties hereto fol¬ 
lows : (that ns to say) 

lb It -hall he lawful for th'- Postmaster General at anytime and from time to titne 
to delegate any of the powers vested in him by virtue of these presents to such person 
or person* as he shall think fit. 

45. i he Company shall undertake for.tbem selves all arrangements relative to onar- 

antine as connected with the due and regular performance of the conditions of this 
* ont.raot. 


4C. The Jvmis 
ance of this Cont 


Commissi onersi of the Admiralty shall at any time during the continu- 
tract if they'shall consider it necessarv for the n * *' ' 


public interest have 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


US 




power and be at liberty to purchase all or any of the said vessels at a valuation or to 
charter tne same exclusively for Her Majesty’s service at a rate of hire to he mutually 
fixed and agreed on by them and the said Company out if any difference should at 
any time or times arise as to the amount of valuation or hire* so robe paid such differ¬ 
ence shall he settled by arbitration in manner hereinafter provided and the said Com¬ 
missioners in the case of hiring any such vessel shall return the same to the said Com¬ 
pany in the same state and condition as s -.s in at the tiniAof any snch hiring reason¬ 

able wear and tear excepted, and if any difference should arise upon that point the same 
shall be settled in the -a me manner as the amount for the hiring is to be settled in ease of 
difference. And it is further agreed that in case of such purchase or hire the service 
hereby contracted to be performed shall be performed by other vessels of the Company 
of a similar description to the vessel or vessels purchased or hired if they can in due and 
proper time furnish them and in the event of the said Company being allowed by the 
Postmaster General to contiane to perform only a portion of the service there shall be 
paid to the said Company snob annual sum of money as shall be agreed upon by the 
said Postmaster General and the said Company and in case of their differing as to the 
amount the difference to be settled by two arbitrators or an umpire to be chosen 
respectively as aforesaid. 

47. This Contract shall commence on or as from the loth day of August 1574 and 
shall continue in force until the lsr day of February 15"d and shall then determine if 
the Postmaster General shall by writing under his hand or under the hand of the Sec¬ 
retary or one of the Assistant Secretaries for the time Wing of the Post Office have 
given to the Company or if the Company shall have given to the Post raster General 
24 calendar months' notice that this Contract shall so determine but If neither the Post¬ 
master General nor the Company shal l give any such notice this Contract shall continue 
in force even after the said 1st day of February 15-50 until the expiration of a 04 calendar 
months' notice in writing as aforesaid which n ay be given by either of the parties 
hereto to the other of them and which last-mentioned notice may be given at any time 
after the 1st day of February 157". 

45. The Contract dated the nth day of August 1670 and made between the Post¬ 
master General of the one part and the Company of the other part shall remain in 
force until the said loth day of August 1"?4 and no longer and as from the last men¬ 
tioned date the same is hereby terminated and anulled. 

47. If on the determination of this Agreement any vessel or vessels shall have started 
or shall start with the mails in conformity with^this Agr- enient such voyage or voyages 
shall be continued and performed and the u a delivered and received during the 
same a< if this Agreement ha l ram aim d in force with regard to any such vesse.s and 


services. And with respect to such vessels and services as last aforesaid this Agree¬ 
ment shall be considered as having terminated when such vessels have reached their 
port or place of destination and such services shall have been performed but the said 
Company shall not be entitled to receive any payment or compensation tor the same. 

D. All and everv the sums of money hereby stipulated to be paid by the Company 
unto Her Miresty Her heirs and suer* ss rs shall be considered as stipulated or aseer- 
ed damages whether any damage or loss has or has not been sustained and shall 
and mav be retained by the Postmaster General out of any moneys payable or which 
mav thereafter become payable to the Company or the payment may be enforced as 
a debt due to Her Majesty with full costs of suit at the discretion of the Postmaster 
General Provided however that the payment by the Company of any sums of money 
fby way of penaltities) shall not in any manner projudi ight of the Postmaster 

General to treat the failure (if any) on the parr of the Company to provide a proper 
vessel or to perform any voyage at or within the time for the time Wing appointed 
for the performance thereof as a breach ot this Agreement. 

51. All notices or directions which the Postmaster General his officers agents or 
hers are ln ivb\ authorised to give to the Company their orth — 
her than any notice of termination of this Contract may at the option of the Post 
s - General his o: s igents or others either be delivered to the master of any 



taht any notice of termination of this contract shall be served on the Company theit 
officers servants or agents at their office or last known office iu London. 


52. The Company shall not assign underlet or dispose of this Agreement or any pari 
hereof without the consent of the Postmaster General signified m writing under his 
muni or under the hand of the Secretary or one of the|Assistant Secretaries ot the Post 
Office and in case of the same or any part thereof being assigned underlet or other 
wise disposed of or of any great or habitual broach of this Agreement or any covenant 
matter or thing heroin contained on the part ot the f ompany their officers agents oi 


the 

h 


servants and whether there be or be not any penalty or sum of money payable by 
the Company for any breach it shall he lawful for the Postmaster General it he shall 


4 





I 


150 AMERICAN SHIRRING INTERESTS. 

think tit (and notwithstanding there may or may not have been any former breach of 
this Contract) by writing under his hand or under the hand of the Secretary or one of 
the Assistant Secretaries of the Post Office to determine this Agreement without any 
previous notice to the Company or their agents nor shall the Company be entitled to 
any compensation in respect of such determination and such determination shall not 
§ deprive the Postmaster General of any right or remedy to which he would otherwise 
be entitled by reason of si^ch breach or any prior breach of this Contract. 

53. If at any time during the continuance of this Agreement or after the determi¬ 
nation thereof any dispute shall arise between the parties hereto or their successors 
respectively concerning any breach or alleged breach by or on the part of the Com¬ 
pany of this Agreement or the sufficiency of any such breach to justify the Postmaster 
General in putting an end to the same or concerning the amount of consideration to 
be paid to <>r allowed by the Company as the case may be for such altered services 
as hereinbefore in that behalf mentioned or concerning any of the covenants matters or 
things herein contained or in anywise relating thereto and notwithstanding the power 
herein contained to determine this Agreement and any execution or attempted execu¬ 
tion of such power such dispute shall be referred to two arbitrators one to be chosen 
from time to time by the Postmaster General and the other by the Company and if 
such arbitrators should at anytime or times not agree in the matter or question referred 
to them then such question in difference shall be referred by them to an umpire to be 
chosen by such arbitrators before they proceed with the reference to them and the 
joint and concurrent award of the said arbitrators or the separate award of the said 
umpire when the said arbitrators cannot agree shall be binding and conclusive upon 
both parties. 

54. Any submission to arbitration in pursuance of this Agreement may be made a 
rule of any Her Majesty’s courts of record pursuant to the statute in that case made 
and provided on the application of either party. 

55. In pursuance of the provisions contained in the Act of Parliament passed in the 
22nd year of the reign of King George the Third intituled “An Act for restraining any 
Person concerned in any Contract Commission or Agreement made for the Public 
Service from being elected or sitting and voting as a Member of the House of Com¬ 
mons ” no Member of the House of Commons shall be admitted to any share or part of 
this Agreement or to any benefit to arise therefrom contrary to the true intent and 
meaning of the said Act. 

56. This Agreement shall not be binding until it has been approved by a resolution 
of the House of Commons. 

57. And lastly for the due and faithful performance of all and singular the cove¬ 
nants conditions provisoes clauses articles and agreements hereinbefore contained 
which on the part and behalf of the said Company are or ought to be observed per¬ 
formed fulfilled and kept the said Company do hereby bind themselves and their 
successors unto our Sovereign Lady the Queen in the sum of 45,000 l. of lawful money 
of the United Kingdom to be paid to our said Lady the Queen her heirs and succes¬ 
sors by way of stipulated or ascertained damages hereby agreed upon between the 
Postmaster General and the Company in case of the failure on the part of the Com¬ 
pany in the due execution of this contract or any part thereof. 

In witness whereof the said Lord John Manners Her Majesty’s Postmaster General 
hath hereunto set his hand and seal and the said Peninsular and Oriental Steam 
Navigation Company have caused their common seal to be hereunto affixed the day 
and year first above written. 


FIRST SCHEDULE. 

Route no. 1. —Once a week through the Suez Canal . 

From Southampton to Bombay, calling at Gibraltar, Malta, Suez, and Aden, and 
back from Bombay and Southampton, calling at Aden, Suez, Malta, and Gibraltar. 

Route no. 2.— Once a week. 

From Brindisi to Alexandria, and back from Alexandria to Brindisi. 

Route no. 3.— Once in every two weeks. 

1 lorn Suez to Calcutta, calling at Aden, Point de Galie, and Madras, and back 
from Calcutta to Suez, calling at Madras, Point de Galie, and Aden. 

* 

Route no. 4.— Once in ivtry two weeks. 

t i ont Bombay to Shanghai, calling at Point de Galie, Penang, Singapore and 
Hong Kong, and back trom Shanghai to Bombav, calling at Hong Kong, Sino’anore 
Penang, and Point de Galie. * 55 & r 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


151 


Route no. 5.— Once in every Uvo weeks. 

From Hong Kong to Yokohama, and back from Yokohama to Hong Kong. 


SECOND SCHEDULE. 

Once a week. 

From Plymouth to Bombay, calling at Gibraltar, Malta, Suez, and Aden, and back 
trom Bombay to Plymouth, calling at Aden, Suez, Malta, and Gibraltar. 


TUI HD SCHEDULE. 


Once a week. 

From Liverpool to Bombay, calling at Gibraltar, Malta, Suez, and Aden, and back 
trom Bombay to Liverpool, calling at Aden, Suez, Malta, and Gibraltar. 

G . ^ , , , , JOHN MANNERS. 

Signed sealed and delivered by the above-named John James Robert Manners, Her 
Majesty’s Postmaster General, in the presence of 


[l. s.] F. A. R. Langton, 

Private Secretary to the Postmaster General, General Postoffice, London. 

The Common Seal of the above-named Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation 
Company was hereunto affixed in the presence of— 


THE SEAL OF THE PENINSULAR 
AND ORIENTAL STEAM NAVI¬ 
GATION COMPANY. 


P. D. Hadow, 

William H. Hall, 

J. R. Engledue, 

H. Bayley, 

Directors. 


Z. Brooke, 

General Post Office, London. 


A. M. BETHUNE, 

Secretary. 


Treasury Minute, dated 13 July 1874. 

My Lords read a letter from the Postmaster General, dated lOtli instant, forward¬ 
ing a copy of the Contract, dated 8th July 1874, between Her Majesty’s Postmaster 
General and the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, under which 
the vessels conveying the heavy portion of the India, &c., mails, are to be permitted 
to make use of the Suez Canal, and the Company agree to give up 20,000 l. a year of 
the subsidy enjoyed by them under their present Contract (which Contract is to ter¬ 
minate on the loth August next), thus reducing such subsidy from 450,000 l. to 
430,000?. a year; and other advantages accrue to the public. 

Provision is also made in the new Contract empowering the Company to modify the 
services performed by them by substituting Liverpool (as in the present Contract) or 
Plymouth for Southampton as one of the ports to and from which mails are to be 
conveyed on giving three months’ notice of their desire to do so. 

The new Contract to continue in force uni il same date as the Contract under which 
the Company have been for some years working, viz., 1st February 1880, if 24 months’ 
previous notice has been given. 

The following Treasury Minute, dated 24th ult., which my Lords again read, sets 
out fully the whole case, and the reasons which have induced them to consent to the 
conclusion of another. Contract with the Company in substitution for that dated 6th 
August 1870, which is to terminate on the 15th August next, as above stated. 

u My Lords have before them a letter from the Postmaster General, dated the 10th 
instant,* stating that he communicated to the Directors of the Peninsular and Oriental 
Steam Navigation Company the decision contained in the letter from this Board of 
the 15tli ult., founded on the Treasury Minute of 13th May, referred to in the next 
page, with respect to the conditions to which the Company were willing to agree, if 
permitted to carry the heavy portion of the India mails through the Suez Canal, and 
requested them to state whether they had any new proposals to submit for the con¬ 
sideration of Her Majesty’s Government. 



152 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


“Lord John Maimers forwards copy of the reply received from thp Directors, dated 
the 6th instant, in which they state the whole of the circumstances connected with 
their application to adopt the Canal route for the carriage of the heavy mails, and 
offer, if the Government prefer such an arrangement, to surrender one-half of the 
Company’s profits above 8 per cent, in lieu of a fixed annual deduction of 20,000 1. 
from the subsidy. 

“ My Lords have also again before them the letter from the Postmaster General, 
dated the 31st March last, wherein he states, with reference to the application of the 
Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, that ‘ as the Canal route has 
now come into general use for steam vessels, it seems to him that to insist upon the 
mail packets, which, of course, carry passengers and cargo, as well as mails, going 
out of their course for the purpose of landing or embarking the mails at Alexandria, 
would be acting harshly towards a Company which has served the public most ef¬ 
ficiently for a great number of years, has invested an enormous capital in its under¬ 
taking, and has promptly met every suggestion made from time to time for an im¬ 
provement in the mail service’; and that, impressed with this feeling,he has com¬ 
municated freely with the Directors on the subject of the change which they desire 
to make in the mail route, and has obtained from them an offer to the following effect, 
Avliich he recommends should be accepted:— 

“First. That the Company will maintain a tug in the Suez Canal for the purpose 
of guarding against any casual difficulties of navigation. 

“ Second. That a fixed number of hours shall be allowed for the voyage. 


“From Brindisi to Bombay - ) 24 hours less than the num- 
Poiut de Galle / her allowed from port to 

Shanghai - ) port by existing time table. 


“[In a memorandum from the Company, dated 20th January last, it is represented 
that the mails would be delivered in Australia nearly two days in advance of the 
dates required by the present time table.] 


“ Bombay to Brindisi. 

“Point de Galle ditto ... 

“ Bombay to Southampton 
“ Point de Galle ditto .... 


^ Same number as by ex 
^ isting time table. 

I Same number as by ex 
S isting time table. 


“Third. That no premiums be in future paid for delivery of mails earlier than the 
Company is bound to deliver the same. 

“Fourth. That on the outward steamers from Brindisi and homeward steamers to 
Southampton a penalty of 100 l. be incurred for any excess of time after the packets 
are 12 hours over-due, and a further 100 l. for every complete 12 hours additional, to 
whatever cause the delay may be attributable, other than damage to vessel or ma¬ 
chinery. 

“The penalties and time allowed in the other portion of the service being the same 
as at present; the penalties between Bombay or Point de Galle and Brindisi as at 
present, being 50 l. for every 12 hours of delay. 

“ Fifth. That the Company will submit to an abatement of 20,000 l from their an¬ 
nual subsidy, in consideration of the above arrangement being carried into effect. 

“It is also stated in the Company’s offer, that in the event of a steamer grounding 
in the canal, so as to be entirely unable to carry on her own mails (such an occurrence 
never having happened), the Company will have their intermediate Bombay steamer 
available in such an emergency so as to prevent delay, and the Company will also 
undertake the delivery of the local mails from Gibraltar and Malta at Alexandria via 
Ismailia, and rice versa, either by landing them direct from the mail steamer or for¬ 
warding them in a despatch boat from Port Said; and with regard to the mail be¬ 
tween this country and Alexandria, Lord John Manners states that he does not think 
there will be any difficulty in suppressing it altogether, and sending the correspond¬ 
ence, "which is small in amount, either via Brindisi or by French packet from Mar¬ 
seilles. 

“My Lords also read their Minute of the 13th ultimo,* wherein, after adverting to 
all the circumstances of the case, they came to the conclusion that they would not be 
warranted in entertaining favourably the offer of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam 
Navigation Company, on the ground that the proposed surrender of 20,000 l. does not 
seem in any degree adequate to the value of the concession sought, even by the Com¬ 
pany s own estimate, and they have also perused with attention the correspondence 
of their predecessors with the Post Office and the Peninsular and Oriental Steam 
Navigation Company, in regard to the application preferred by the Company. 

“ Having reference to the communication from the Peninsular and Oriental Steam 






AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


153 


Na\ igation Company, dated the 6th instant, now before them, and to the renewed 
recommendation ot the Postmaster General that the offer of the Company should be 
ta\ ourably entertained, Lord John Manners, in his letter of the 10th instant, stating 
that lie feels it his duty to observe that he adheres to the opinion expressed in his 
lettei ot the .list March last, that the terms offered on the part of the Company were 
fair and reasonable, and that he has no hesitation in saying that it would, in his 
opinion, be to the interests of the public that they should be accepted; my Lords feel 
it incumbent on them again to have the whole question under consideration. 

“In the letter from the Company, it is observed that their proposals are— 

“ 1st. To accelerate the outward mails 24 to 40 hours. 

“ 2nd. To quadruple the existing penalties in case of delay at terminal points. 

“ 3rd. To make these penalties absolute (except in case of shipwreck or damage to 
machinery), instead of being contingent on weather and minor circumstances, as they 
are at present. 

“ 4th. To abate 20,000 l. from the present subsidy. 

“The three* first of these proposals are clearly beneficial to the public, and are 
therefore such as should be entertained. It is with respect to the last of these pro¬ 
posals that my Lords and their predecessors took exception as not being sufficiently 
favourable to the Government, in the event of the request of the Company to be 
allowed to run their steamers with the heavy portion of the India mails through the 
Suez Canal being complied with. 

“ From the correspondence now before them, my Lords Hod that, in the opinion of 
their predecessors, the Company should consent to an abatement of 60,000 7. a year in 
consideration of their application being acceded to; and my Lords, by their letter of 
the 15th instant, declined to entertain favourably the application of the Company, 
on the grounds that ‘the proposed surrender of 20,000 7. does not seem in any degree 
adequate to the value of the concession sought even by their own estimate.’ 

“ With regard to the observation in the Treasury letter as to the inadequacy of the 
amount which the Company propose to surrender, the Directors remark that such ob¬ 
servation seems to imply that, as the ‘Company’s position was altered for the worse 
by the opening of the Suez Canal, the Company would, by using the canal, retrieve that 
position, and that the Government in giving permission for the mail service to be 
worked by that route would be entitled to share in the benefit thus to be regained by 
the Company,’ and they state that in thus seeking to maintain their position, viz., 
‘that of earning a moderate return upon their capital and maintaining the stability 
of the Company, the Directors did not, as implied in the Treasury letter, form any 
higher estimate for the future;’ and with the view to show that any estimate of large 
profit would be fallacious they submit the following facts: 

“ ‘The revenue of the Company for the year to 30tli September 1869 (the canal opened 
in November that year), in freight and passage money, amounted to 1,885,39? 7. To 
the same date in 1873 the revenue from the same sources was 1,571,166 7.’ 

“But it is now shown ‘ that in the latter year the Company’s steamers, whether using 
the railway or the canal, were quite full, and they carried a larger number of passen¬ 
gers and a much larger amount of cargo than in 1869, when the revenue was 314,000 7. 
greater.’ 

“ The Company show that the great difference in the revenue arises from the reduction 
in passenger and cargo rates, caused by the competition of steamers using the canal. 
The Directors also state that, contrary to their own convictions of the justice of the 
case, but with the desire of closing a matter which, in its present state, is disadvantageous 
to the public as well as to the Company, they have offered an abatement of 20,000 7. from 
their subsidy, while at the same time they have offered an improved service which 
can only be carried on at a largely increased expenditure; and they further state that 
if ‘their Lordships are of opinion that the views of the Directors are less sanguine 
than the prospect of the canal service warrants,’ that they will be happy, in lieu of surren¬ 
dering 20,000 /. of their subsidy to share with the Government in equal proportions 
the profits of the Company above 8 per cent., arising out of the mail service now sub¬ 
sidised by Her Majesty’s Government. 

“ My Lords are decidedly of opinion that it is not advisable to accept the above 
proposal of the Directors of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, 
that the Government should, in lieu of an abatement of 20,000 7. a year being made 
from the subsidy, payable to the Company, share the profits of the Company above 8 
per cent., in consideration of the Company being permitted to make use of the Suez 
Canal for their vessels conveying the heavy portion of the India mails; but upon a 
review of all the circumstances connected with this matter, and having again given 
the whole subject their most attentive consideration, they have come to the conclu¬ 
sion that they will be warranted in deferring to the strongly expressed opinion of the 
Postmaster General, and in, therefore, consenting to his acceding to the proposals ot' 
the Company as contained in the letter from the Company, dated the 25th March last, 
which was forwarded in his Lordship’s letter of the 31st of the same month. 


154 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


“ In consenting to reduce tlie amount of the abatement from the Company s subsidy 
in consideration of their offer being accepted, from the sum demanded by their pred¬ 
ecessors, viz., from 60,000 Z. to 20,000 Z., and thereby reversing their own previous de¬ 
cision, my Lords deem it right to remark, that they are greatly influenced by the fuller 
explanation given by the Company as to the causes of the reduction of their revenue, 
and the slight probability of any considerable increase resulting from the contem¬ 
plated changes in their service, and also that the following advantages will be ob¬ 
tained from accepting the offer of the Company, viz., a promised arrival of the out¬ 
ward mails at their destination 24 hours earlier than at present (in Australia nearly 
two days). 

‘‘An arrival of those mails at least 12 hours earlier guaranteed by a penalty of 100 Z. 

“An arrival of those mails at the present table time guaranteed by a penalty ot 
200 Z. 

“An arrival of those mails within 12 hours after the present table time guaranteed 
by a penalty of 300 while no penalty is now incurred when the delay does not ex¬ 
tend to 24 hours. 

“An arrival of those mails within 24 hours after the present table time guaranteed 
by a penalty of 400 Z. instead of 50 Z., with a penalty of 100 Z. for every further delay of 
12 hours, instead of one of 50 Z. for every 24 hours. 

“An arrival at Southampton of the mails from Bombay and Point de Galle within 
12 hours after the table time guaranteed by a penalty of 100 Z., while np penalty is 
now incurred when the delay does not extend to 24 hours. 

“An arrival of those mails within 24 hours after the table time guaranteed by a pen¬ 
alty of 200 Z. instead of 50 Z. as at present, with a penalty of 100 Z. for every further 
delay of 12 hours instead of one of 50 Z. for every 24 hours. 

“The substitution of absolute penalties for penalties not payable when the cause of 
delay arises from causes beyond the Company’s control. 

“A saving of 20,000 Z. a year in the subsidy. 

“An estimated saving of 2,000 Z. a year in the premiums now paid to the Company 
for voyages performed within the time allowed. ' 

“A saving of 2,000 Z. a year in the amount to be paid to the Egyptian Government 
for the transit of the mails by the railway. 

“The question now arises as to the manner in which effect should be given to the 
decision of this Board in this case; and although my Lords are of opinion that they 
have power to alter the terms of the present contract in the manner proposed, the 
effect of such alteration being a material reduction in the amount of the subsidy pay¬ 
able to the Company, they consider that it will be advisable that the question should 
be submitted for the consideration of the House of Commons; and with that view 
they have come to the conclusion that'the proper course will be for a new contract to 
be entered into with the Company embodying the proposals to which my Lords have 
given their assent, and terminating at the same date as the contract now in existence.” 

My Lords desire that a copy of the contract, together with a copy of the aforegoing 
Minute, be laid upon the Table of the House of Commons. 

(Indorsed:) Post Office (East India, China, and Japan mails contract). Copy of a 
contract, dated the 8th day of July 1874, between the Postmaster General and the 
Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, for the conveyance of the East 
India, China, and Japan mails: together with copy of a Treasury Minute, dated the 
14th day of July 1874, thereon. (Mr. William Henry Smith.) Ordered, by the House 
of Commons, to be printed, 16 July 1874. 


POST A L ( ONTIIA CTS. 

Return to an Order of the Honourable The House of Commons, dated 6 December, 1867 ;— for, 
Copies “of Contracts entered into between Her Majesty's Postmaster General and the North 
German Lloyd, the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Company, and 
Messrs. Canard, Burns, and MacTver, for the Conveyance of Mails to New York:” "and, 
of the Contract entered into between Her Majesty's Postmaster General and the Liverpool, 
New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Company for the Conveyance of Mails to Halifax , 
with Copies of the Correspondence relating thereto 

George Ward Hunt. 

Treasury Chambers, 6 December, 1867. 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 
No. 1. 

North American Mails. 


155 


Artides of Agreouicnt made this 30th day of November in the year 18(37 between the 
Most Noble James Duke of Montrose Her Majesty’s Postmaster General for the time 
being of the first part the North German Lloyd of Bremen (hereinafter called the 
Contractors) oi the second part and Henry Hutli of Moorgate-street in the City of 
London Merchant and Daniel Meinertzhagen of the same place Merchant of the 
fluid part W ltness that the Contractors for themselves their successors and assigns 
hereby covenant with Her Majesty’s Postmaster General his executors administra¬ 
tors successors and assigns Her Majesty’s Postmaster General for the time being in 
manner following (that is to say): 

1. The Contractors will at all times during the continuance of this Agreement or so 
long as the whole or any part ot the service hereby agreed to be performed ought to 
be pertormed in pursuance thereof provide keep seaworthy and in complete repair 
and readiness for the purpose of conveying as hereinafter provided all Her Majesty’s 
mails (m hi cli term “mails’ all bags boxes or packets of letters newspapers books 
oi printed papers and all other articles transmissible by the post without regard 
either to the place to which they may be addressed or to that in which they may have 
originated also all empty bags empty boxes and other stores and articles used or to 
be used in carrying on the Post Office service which shall bo sent by or to or from the 
Post Office are agreed to be comprehended) which shall at any time and from time to 
time by the Postmaster General or any of liis officers or agents be required to be con¬ 
veyed as hereinafter provided a sufficient number of good substantial and efficient 
steam vessels ot adequate power and speed and supplied with first-rate appropriate 
steam engines and in all respects suited to the performance of the services herein 
agreed to be performed within the respective times herein stipulated. 

2. 1 he vessels to be employed under this Agreement shall be always furnished with 
all appropriate and necessary machinery engines apparel furniture stores tackle boats 
fuel lamps oil for lamps and engines tallow provisions anchors cables fire pumps and 
other proper means tor extinguishing fire lighting conductors charts chronometers 
proper nautical instruments and whatever else may be requisite for equipping the 
said vessels and rendering them constantly efficient for the service hereby agreed to 
be performed and also manned and provided with competent officers with appropriate 
certificates according to the German law and with a sufficient number of competent 
engineers and a sufficient crew of able seamen and other men. 

3. One of such vessels so equipped and manwed as aforesaid shall on every Tuesday 
during the continuance of this Agreement put to sea from Southampton with Her 
Majesty’s mails on board and proceed thence direct to New York in the United States 
of America. 

4. The tiirte of departure of each of the said vessels from Southampton aforesaid 
shall be such as the said Postmaster General shall from time to time by notice in writing 
direct provided always that the said Postmaster General shall give to the Contract¬ 
ors three calendar months’ notice in writing of any change in the time appointed for 
such departure. 

5. Each voyage shall be considered to commence on the embarkation of the mails 
at Southampton and to terminate on the arrival of the said mails at the quarantine 
ground in New York. 

6. The duration of such voyage shall not exceed 27(3 hours. 

7. If the Contractors fail on any Tuesday during the continuance of this Contract 
to provide an efficient vessel at Southampton aforesaid ready to put to sea at the 
appointed hour then and so often as the same shall so happen the Contractors shall 
forfeit and pay unto Her Majesty Her heirs and successors the sum of 300 /. 

8. The Contractors shall if required by the Postmaster General receive and allow to 
remain on board each of the said vessels while employed in the performance of this 
Agreement and while returning from New York to Southampton an officer to be ap¬ 
pointed by the Postmaster General to take charge of the said mails. 

9. The Contractors shall also receive and allow to remain on board each of the said 
vessels while employed in the performance of this Agreement and also while return¬ 
ing from New York to Southampton such a number of officers of the Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral as shall bo required for the purpose of sorting and making up the mails conveyed 
or to be conveyed by such vessel. 

10. The Contractors shall provide suitable accommodation and victualling for the 
officers employed in the service of the Postmaster General as aforesaid either as chief 
cabin passengers or as fore cabin passengers at the option of the said Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral and the Postmaster General shall pay to the Contractors by way of passage money 
for the accommodation and victualling of each such officer in respect of every voyage 
between Southampton and New York and back the sum of 33/. for every such officer 


156 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


who shall he treated as a chief cabin passenger and the sum of 221. lor every such 
officer who shall be treated as a fore cabin passenger. 

11. The Contractors shall at their own cost provide to the satisfaction of the Post¬ 
master General on each of the vessels to be employed under this Agreement a separate 
and convenient room for the convenient and secure deposit of the mails under lock 
and key and shall also at the like cost (if and when they shall be required so to do 
by the Postmaster General) erect and provide to the satisfaction of the Postmaster 
General on each of such vessels a separate and convenient room for sorting and mak¬ 
ing up the said mails and shall provide in such room all such furniture lamps fittings 
and other conveniences as shall be necessary and all such furniture lamps fittings and 
other conveniences shall be from time to time cleansed and kept in repair and the oil 
for the lamps supplied by the servants and at the cost of the Contractors and the serv¬ 
ices of the crew of every such vessel shall from time to time be given in the conveyance 
of the mails between the mail room and the sorting room and the Postmaster General 
shall pay to the Contractors the sum of.75 l. in respect of each vessel on which such 
sorting room as aforesaid shall be erected or provided. 

12. At each port or place where the said mails are to be delivered and received the 
officer having charge of mails shall whenever and as often as by him shall be deemed 
practicable or necessary and either with or without any other officer in the service of 
the Postmaster General be conveyed on shore and also from the shore to the vessel 
employed for the time being in the performance of this agreement together with or 
(if such officer shall consider it necessary for the purpose of this Agreement so to do) 
without mails in a suitable and seaworthy boat of not less than four oars to be furn¬ 
ished with effectual covering for the mails and properly provided manned and equipped 
by the Contractors. 

13. If the Postmaster General during the continuance of this Agreement thinks fit 
to entrust the charge aud custody of the mails or any part thereof to the master or 
commander of the vessel to be employed for the time being in the performance of this 
Agreement and in all cases where the officer or other person appointed to have charge 
of the mails shall be absent the master or commander of such vessel shall without 
any charge (other than that herein provided to be paid to the Contractors) take due 
care of and the Contractors shall be responsible for the receipt safe custody and de¬ 
livery of the said mails and each of such masters or commanders shall make the usual 
declaration or declarations required or which may hereafter be required by the Post¬ 
master General in such and similar cases and furnish such journals returns ayd in¬ 
formation to and perform such services as the Postmaster General or his agents may 
require and every such master or commander or officer duly authorised by him having 
the charge of mails shall himself immediately on the arrival at the said port or place 
of any such vessels deliver all mails for such port or place into the hands of the Post¬ 
master or such other person at such port or place as the Postmaster General shall au¬ 
thorise to receive the same. 

14. The Contractors shall not convey in any of the vessels employed, under this 
Agreement any nitro-glycerine or other article which shall have been legally declared 
specially dangerous. 

15. The Contractors and all commanding and other officers of the vessels employed 
in the performance of this agreement and ali agents seamen and servants of the Con¬ 
tractors shall at all times punctually attend to the orders and directions of the Post¬ 
master General his officers or agents as to the mode time and place of landing deliver¬ 
ing and receiving mails. 

16. And in consideration of the due and faithful performance by the Contractors of 
all the services hereby agreed to be by them performed the Postmaster General doth 
hereby covenant that there shall be paid to the Contractors out of such aids or supplies 
as may be from time to time provided and appropriated by Parliament for that purpose 
so long as they perform the whole of the said services in the manner and with such 
vessels as herein respectively provided the following sums that is to say the sum of 
one shilling for every ounce of letters conveyed by them and the sum of threepence 
for every pound of newspapers conveyed by them, and the sum of fivepeuce for every 
pound of book-packets or packets of trade patterns conveyed by them and except 
where otherwise expressly provided none of the duties performed by the Contractors 
in pursuance of this Agreement shall give them any claim to remuneration beyond the 
payment hereinbefore specified. 

17. Provided always and it is hereby declared that if the duration of any voyage 
made in pursuance of this Agreement shall exceed the time hereinbefore provided in 
that behalf by a period equal to or exceeding 12 hours then and in every such case a 
deduction shall be made from the amount payable to the Contractors in respect of 
such voyage under the last preceding clause of one-eighth part of such amount in re¬ 
spect of each complete period of 12 hours by which such voyage shall exceed the 
time hereinbefore provided in that behalf so that (by way of example) if such voyage 
shall exceed the time hereinbefore provided in that behalf by four complete days no 
payment ohall be made to the contractors in respect of such voyage. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


157 


18. The Postmaster General shall as soon as conveniently may be after the 1st day 
of January the 1st day of April the 1st day of July and the 1st day of October in 
every year during the continuance of this Contract cause an account to be made out 
and signed by the Receiver and Accountant General for the time being of the General 
Post Office of all sums of money which shall up to the last preceding of such quarterly 
days have become payable to the Contractors in respect of the carriage of mails in 
pursuance of the preceding clauses of this Agreement and every account so made out 
and signed shall as between the parties hereto be conclusive evidence of the. facts 
stated therein and of the amount due to the Coutractors.as aforesaid and such amount 
shall be forthwith paid to the Contractors out of such aids or supplies as aforesaid 
after deducting therefrom any sums of money in respect of forfeitures which the Con¬ 
tractors may have incurred as herein provided. 

19. And it is hereby further agreed and declared between and by the said parties 
to these presents as follows (that is to say):— 

If at any time during the continuance of this Agreement or after the determination 
thereof any dispute shall arise between the parties hereto or their executors adminis¬ 
trators or successors respectively concerning any breach or alleged breach by or on 
the part of the Contractors of this Agreement or the sufficiency of any such breach to 
justify the Postmaster General in putting an end to the same or concerning the amount 
of consideration to be paid to or allowed by the Contractors as the case may be or 
concerning any of the covenants matters or things herein contained or in anywise 
relating thereto and notwithstanding the power herein contained to determine this 
Agreement and any’ execution or attempted execution of such power such dispute 
shall be referred to two arbitrators one to be chosen from time to time by the Post¬ 
master General and the other by the Contractors and if such arbitrators should at 
any time or times not agree in the matter or question referred to them then such ques¬ 
tion in difference shall be referred by’ them to an umpire to be chosen by such arbi¬ 
trators before they proceed with the reference to them. And the joint and concurrent 
award of the said arbitrators or tbe separate award of the said umpire when the said 
arbitrators cannot agree shall be binding and conclusive upon both parties. 

20. Any submission to arbitration in pursuance of this Agreement may be made a 
rule of any of Her Majesty’s Courts of Record pursuant to the statute in that case 
made and provided on the application of either party. 

21. The Contractors shall not receive or permit to be received in the United King¬ 
dom for conveyance on board any of the vessels employed under this Agreement any 
letters other than those contained in Her Majesty’s mails the whole postage of which 
shall belong to Her Majesty and shall be at the disposal of the Postmaster General. 

22. This agreement shall commence on the 1st day of January 1868 and shall con¬ 
tinue in force until the expiration of a written notice given at any time and by either 
the Contractors or the Postmaster General of not less than six calendar months. 

23. All and every’ the sums of money hereby stipulated to be paid by the Contractors 
unto Her Majesty Her heirs and successors shall be considered as stipulated or ascer¬ 
tained damages whether any damage or loss has or has not been sustained and shall 
atid may be retained by the Postmaster General out of any monies payable or which 
may thereafter become payable to the Contractors or the payment may be enforced as 
a debt due to Her Majesty with full costs of suit at the discretion of the Postmaster- 
General provided however that the payment by the Contractors of any sums of 
money by way of penalties shall not in any manner prejudice the right of the Post¬ 
master General to treat the failure (if any) on the part of the Contractors to provide 
a proper vessel or to perform any voyage at or within the times hereinbefore in that 
behalf mentioned as a breach of this Agreement. 

24. The Contractors shall not assign underlet or dispose of this Agreement or any 
part thereof without the consent of the Postmaster General signified in writing under 
his hand or under the hand of the Secretary or one of the Assistant Secretaries of the 
Post Office and in case of the same or any part thereof being assigned underlet or 
otherwise disposed of or of any great or habitual breach of this Agreement or of any 
covenant matter or thing herein contained on the part ot the Contractors their offi¬ 
cers agents or servants and whether there be or be not any penalty or sum of money 
payable by the Contractors for any breach it shall be lawful for the Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral if he shall think fit (and notwithstanding there may or may not have been any 
former breach of this Contract) by writing under his hand or under the hand of the 
Secretary or one of the Assistant Secretaries of the Post Office to determine this Agree¬ 
ment without any previous notice to the Contractors or their agents nor shall the 
Contractors be entitled to any compensation in respect of such determination and such 
determination shall not deprive the Postmaster General for the time being of any 
right or remedy to which he would otherwise be entitled by reason of such breach or 
any prior breach of such Contract. 

25. If on the determination of this Agreement any vessel or vessels shall have 
started or shall start with the mails in conformity with this Agreement such voyage 
or voyages shall be continued and performed and the mails be delivered and received 


158 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


during the same as if this Agreement had remained in force with regard to any such 
vessels and services and with respect to such vessels and services as last aforesaid 
this Agreement shall be considered as having terminated when such vessels shall have 
reached their port or place of destination and such services shall have been performed 
and the Contractors shall receive the same remuneration in respect of each such voy¬ 
age as if this Agreement had continued in full force until the termination thereof. 

20. It shall be lawful for the Postmaster General from time to time to delegate all 
or any of the powers vested in him by virtue of these presents to such person or per¬ 
sons as he shall see tit. 

27. All notices or directions which the Postmaster General his officers agents or 
others are hereby authorized to give to the Contractors their officers servants or 
agents other than any notice of termination of this Contract may at the option of 
the Postmaster General his officers agents or others either be delivered to the master 
of any of the said vessels or other officer or agent of the Contractors in the charge or 
management of any vessel employed iii the performance of this Agreement or sent by 
the post addressed to the Contractors at their office in Bremen or left at the office or 
last known office of their agents in Southampton and any notices or directions so 
given sent or left shall be binding on the Contractors provided always that any notice 
of termination of this Contract shall be sent by post addressed to the Contractors at 
their office or last known office in Bremen or left at the office of their agents in South¬ 
ampton. 

28. In pursuance of the provisions contained in the Act of Parliament passed in the 
22nd year of the reign of King George the 3rd intituled “An Act for restraining any 
person concerned in any Contract Commission or Agreement made for the public serv¬ 
ice from being elected or sitting and voting as a Member of the House of Commons” 
no Member of the House of Commons shall be admitted to any share or part of this 
Agreement or to any benefit to arise therefrom contrary to the true intent and mean¬ 
ing of the said Act. 

29. This Agreement shall not be binding until it has lain upon the Table of the 
House of Commons for one month without disapproval unless it be previously 
approved by a resolution of the said House of Commons. 

30. And lastly for the due and faithful performance of all and singular the covenants 
conditions provisoes clauses articles and agreements hereinbefore contained which on 
the part and behalf of the Contractors their successors and assigns are or ought to be 
observed performed fulfilled or kept the Contractors for themselves and their succes¬ 
sors and the said Henry Huth and Daniel Meinertzhagen for themselves their heirs 
executors and administrators do hereby bind themselves jointly and severally unto 
our Sovereign Lady the Queen in the sum of 5,000 l. of lawful British money to be 
paid to our said Lady the Queen Her heirs and successors by way of stipulated or 
ascertained damages agreed upon between the said Postmaster General aud the Con¬ 
tractors and the said Henry Huth and Daniel Meinertzhagen over and above any other 
sum or sums if any which may be payable in case of the failure of the said Contract¬ 
ors in the due execution of this Agreement or any part thereof. 

In witness whereof the said James Duke of Montrose Her Majesty’s Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral Henry Huth and Daniel Meinertzhagen have hereunto set their hands and seals 
and the Contractors have hereunto caused their common seal to be affixed the day 
and year first above written. 

* MONTROSE, [l. s.l 

Signed sealed and delivered by the within-named James Duke of Montrose Her 
Majesty’s Postmaster General in the presence of 
J. L. du Plat Taylor, 

Private Secretary. 

HENRY HUTH. [l. s.] 

D. MEINERTZHAGEN.* [l. s.] 

Signed sealed and delivered by the witliin-named Henry Huth and Daniel Meinertz¬ 
hagen in the presence of 
Edwin Winter, 

Solicitor’s Department , General Post Office. 

The Managers of the North German Lloyd. 
[German Lloyd, Bremen l. s.] H PETERS Pr 

CRUFEMANN, Director. 

The common seal of the North German Lloyd of Bremen was hereunto affixed in 
the presence ©f 

J. C. Muller, 

Merchant of Bremen. 

M. SCHWOON, 

Her Britannic Majesty's Vice Consul. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


159 


2 . 

North American Mails. 

Articles of Agreement made tliis 3rd day of December in the year 1867 between the 
Most Noble Janies Duke of Montrose Her Majesty’s Postmaster General for the time 
being of the first part William Inman of Liverpool in the county of Lancaster 
(.which said William Inman and his executors and administrators are hereinafter 
designated the Contractors) of the second part and Thomas Langton Birley of Carr 
Hill Kirkham in the said county of Lancaster Esquire and Charles Inman of Liver¬ 
pool aforesaid of the third part Witnesseth that the said William Inman for himself 
iiis heirs executors and administrators doth hereby Covenant with Her Majesty’s 
Postmaster General his executors administrators successors and assigns Her Majes¬ 
ty’s Postmaster General for the time being in the manner following (that is to 
say):— 

1. The Contractors will at all times during the continuance of this Agreement or 
so long as the whole or any part of the services hereby agreed to be performed ought 
to be performed in pursuance thereof provide keep seaworthy and in complete repair 
and readiness for the purpose of conveying as hereinafter provided all Her Majesty’s 
mails (in which term “ Mails” all bags boxes or packets of letters newspapers books 
or printed papers and all other articles transmissible by the post without regard either 
to the place to which they may be addressed or to that in which they may have orig¬ 
inated also all empty bags empty boxes and other stores and articles used or to be used 
in carrying on the Post Office service which shall be sent by or to or from the Post 
Office are agreed to be comprehended) which shall at anytime and from time to time 
by the Postmaster General or any of his officers or agents be required to be conveyed as 
hereinafter provided a sufficient number of good substantial and efficient steam-ves¬ 
sels of adequate power and speed and supplied with first-rate appropriate steam en¬ 
gines and in all respects suited to the performance of the service herein agreed to be 
performed within the respective times herein stipulated. 

2. The vessels to be employed under this Agreement shall be always furnished with 
all appropriate and necessary machinery engines apparel furniture stores tackle 
boats fuel lamps oil for lamps and engines tallow provisions anchors cables fire- 
pumps and other proper means for extinguishing tire lightning conductors charts 
chronometers proper nautical instruments and whatsoever else may be requisite for 
equipping the said vessels and rendering them constantly efficient for the service 
hereby agreed to be performed and also manned aud provided with competent officers 
with appropriate certificates granted pursuant to the Act or Acts of Parliament in force 
for the time being relative to the granting certificates to officers in the merchant serv¬ 
ice and with a sufficient number of efficient engineers and’a sufficient crew of able 
seamen and other men. 

3. One of such vessels so approved equipped and manned as aforesaid shall on every 
Thursday during the continuance of this Agreement put to sea from Queenstown in 
Ireland with Her Majesty’s mails on board and proceed thence direct to New York in 
the United States of America. 

4. The time of departure of each of the said vessels from Queenstow n aforesaid shall 
be such as the said Postmaster General shall from time to time by notice in writing 
appoint provided always that the said Postmaster General shall give to the Contract¬ 
ors three calendar months’ notice in writing of any change in the time appointed for 
such departure. 

5. Each voyage shall be considered to commence on the embarkation of the mails 
at Queenstown aforesaid and to terminate on the arrival of the said mails at the Post 
Office in New York aforesaid. 

6. The duration of each voyage which shall commence between the 20th day of 
September and the 20th day of April (both days inclusive) shall not exceed 336 hours 
and the duration of each voyage which shall commence during the remaining part of 
the year shall not exceed 276 hours. 

7. If the Contractors fail on any Thursday during the continuance of this Contract 
to provide an efficient vessel at Queenstown aforesaid ready to put to sea at the ap¬ 
pointed hour then and so often as the same shall so happen the Contractors shall for¬ 
feit and pay unto Her Majesty Her heirs and successors the sum of 300 l. 

8. The Contractors shall receive and allow to remain on board each of the said ves¬ 
sels w T hile employed in the performance of this Agreement and while returning from 
New York to Queenstown an officer to be appointed by the Postmaster General to 
take charge of the said mails. 

9. The contractors shall also receive and allow to remain on board each of the said 
vessels while employed in the performance of this agreement and also while return¬ 
ing- fVom New' York to Queenstown such a number of officers of the Postmaster Geu- 


160 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


eral as slmll be required for the purpose of sorting and making up the mails conveyed 
or to be conveyed by such vessel. 

10. The Contractors shall provide suitable accommodation and victualling for the 
officers employed in.the service of the Postmaster General as aforesaid either aschiet 
cabin passengers or as fore cabin passengers at the option of the said Postmaster 
General and the Postmaster General shall pay to the Contractors by way of passage- 
money for the accommodation and victualling of each such officer in respect of every 
voyage in either direction between Queenstown and New York the sum ol 22 1. tor 
every such officer who shall be treated as a chief cabin passenger and the sum of 16 /. 
for every such officer who shall be treated as a fore cabin passenger. 

11. The Contractors shall at their own cost provide to the satisfaction of the Post¬ 
master General on each of the vessels to be employed under this Agreement a separate 
and convenient room for the convenient and secure deposit of the mails under lock 
and key and shall also at the like costs (if and when they shall be required so to do 
by the Postmaster General) erect and provide on each of such vessels a separate and 
convenient room for sorting and making up the said mails and shall provide to the 
satisfaction of the Postmaster General in such room all such furniture lamps fittings 
and other conveniences as shall be necessary and all such furniture lamps fittings and 
other conveniences shall be from time to time cleansed and kept in repair and the oil 
for the lamps supplied by the servants and at the cost of the Contractors and the serv¬ 
ices of the crew of every such vessel shall from time to time be given in the convey¬ 
ance of the mails between the mail room and the sorting room. 

12. At each port or place where the said mails are to be delivered and received the 
officer having charge of mails shall whenever and as often as by him shall be deemed 
practicable or necessary and either with or without any other officer in the service of 
the Postmaster General be conveyed on shore and also from the shore to the vessel 
employed for the time being in the performance of this Agreement together with or 
(if such officer shall consider it necessary for the purposes of this Agreement so to do) 
without mails in a suitable and seaworthy boat of not less than four oars to be fur¬ 
nished with effectual covering for the mails and properly provided manned and equipped 
by the Contractors. 

13. If the Postmaster General during the continuance of this Agreement thinks fit 
to entrust the charge and custody of the mails or any part thereof to the master or 
commander of the vessels to be employed for the time being in the performance of 
this Agreement and in all cases where the officer or other person appointed to have 
charge of the mails shall be absent the master or commander of such vessel shall 
without any charge (other than that herein provided to be paid to the Contractors) 
take due care of and the Contractors shall be responsible for the receipt safe custody 
and delivery of the said mails and each of such masters or commanders shall make the 
usual declaration or declarations required or which may hereafter be required by the 
Postmaster General in such and similar cases and furnish such journals returns and in¬ 
formation to and perform such services as the Postmaster General or his agents may 
require and every such master or commander or officer duly authorised by him hav¬ 
ing the charge of mails shall himself immediately on the arrival at any of the said 
ports or places of any such vessels deliver all mails for such port or place into the 
hands of the Postmaster or such other person at such port or place as the Postmaster 
General shall authorise to receive the same. 

14. The Contractors shall not convey in any of the vessels employed under this 
Agreement any nitro-glycerine or other article which shall have been legally declared 
specially dangerous. 

15. The Contractors and all commanding and other officers of the vessels employed 
in the performance of this Agreement and all agents seamen and servants of the Con¬ 
tractors shall at all times punctually attend to the orders and directions of the Post¬ 
master General his officers or agents as to the mode time and place of landing deliver¬ 
ing and receiving mails. 

16. And in consideration Qf the due and faithful performance by the Contractors of 
all the services hereby agreed to be by them performed the Postmaster General doth 
hereby covenant that there shall be paid to the Contractors (out of such aids or sup¬ 
plies as may be from time to time provided and appropriated by Parliament for that 
purpose) so long as they perform the whole of the said services in the manner and 
with such vessels as herein respectively provided the following sums (that is to say) 
the sum of 1 s. for every ounce of letters conveyed by them and the sum of 3 d. for 
every pound of newspapers conveyed by them and the sum of 5 d. for every pound of 
book-packets or packets of trade patterns conveyed by them and except where other¬ 
wise expressly provided none of the duties performed by the Contractors in pursuance 
of this Agreement shall give them any claim to remuneration beyond the payment 
hereinbefore specified. 

17. Provided always and it is hereby declared that if the duration of any voyage 
made in pursuance of this Agreement shall exceed the time hereinbefore provided in 
that behalf by a period equal to or exceeding 12 hours then and in every such case a 


161 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 

\ 

deduction shall be made from tlie amount payable to the Contractors in respect of 
such voyage under the last preceding clause of one-eighth part of such amount in re¬ 
spect of each complete period of 12 hours by which such voyage shall exceed the lime 
hereinbefore provided in that behalf so that by way of example if such voyage shall 
exceed the time hereinbefore provided in that behalf by four complete days no pay¬ 
ment shall be made to the Contractors in respect of such voyage. 

18. The Postmaster General shall as soon as conveniently may be after the 1st day 
of January the 1st day of April the 1st day of July and the 1st day of October in 
every year during the continuance of this Contract cause an account to be made out 
and signed by the Receiver and Accountant General for the time being of the General 
Post Office of all sums of money which shall up to the last preceding of such quar¬ 
terly days have become payable to the Contractors in respect of the carriage of mails 
in pursuance of the preceding clauses of this Agreement and every account so made 
out and signed shall as between the parties hereto be conclusive evidence of the facts 
stated therein and of the amount due to the Contractors as aforesaid and such amount 
shall be forthwith paid to the Contractors out of such aids or supplies as aforesaid 
after deducting therefrom any sums of money in respect of forfeitures which the Con¬ 
tractors may have incurred as herein provided. 

19. And it is hereby further agreed and declared between and by the said parties to 
these presents as follows that is to say: 

If at any time during the continuance of this Agreement or after the determination 
thereof any'dispute shall arise between the parties hereto or their executors adminis¬ 
trators or successors respectively concerning any breach or alleged breach by or on 
the part of the Contractors of this Agreement or the sufficiency of any such breach to 
justify the Postmaster General in putting an end to the same or concerning the amount 
of consideration to be paid to or allowed by the Contractors as the case may be or con¬ 
cerning any of the covenants matters or things herein contained or in anywise relating 
thereto and notwithstanding the power herein contained to determine this Agreement 
and any execution or attempted execution of such power such dispute shall be re¬ 
ferred to two arbitrators one to be chosen from time to time by the Postmaster General 
and the other by the Contractors and if such arbitrators should at any time or times 
not agree in the matter or question referred to them then such question in difference 
shall be referred by them to an umpire to be cliospn by such arbitrators before they 
proceed with the reference to them and the joint and concurrent award of the said 
arbitrators or the separate award of the said umpire when the said arbitrators can¬ 
not. agree shall be binding and conclusive upon both parties. 

20. Any submission to arbitration in pursuance of this Agreement may be made a 
rule of any of Her Majesty’s courts of record pursuant to the statute in that case made 
and provided on the application of either party. 

21. The Contractors shall not receive or permit to be received in the United Kingdom 
for conveyance on board any of the vessels employed under this Agreement any letters 
other than those contained in Her Majesty’s mails the whole postage of which shall 
belong to Her Majesty and shall be at the disposal of the Postmaster General. 

22. This Agreement shall commence on the 1st day of January 18f>8 and shall con¬ 
tinue in force until the expiration of a written notice given at any time and by either 
the contractors or the Postmaster General of not less than six calendar months. 

23. All and every the sums of money hereby stipulated to be paid by the Contractors 
unto Her Majesty her heirs and successors shall be considered as stipulated or ascer¬ 
tained damages whether any damage or loss has or has not been sustained and shall 
and may be retained by the'Postmaster General out of any moneys payable or which 
may thereafter become payable to the Contractors or the payment maybe enforced as 
a debt due to Her Majesty with full costs of suit at the discretion of the Postmaster 
General provided however that the payment by the Contractors of any sums of money 
(by way of penalties) shall not in any manner prejudice the right of the Postmaster 
General to treat the failure (if any) on the part of the Contractors to provide a proper 
vessel or to perform any voyage at or within the times hereinbefore in that behalf 
mentioned as a breach of th s agreement. 

24. The Contractors shall not assign underlet or dispose of this Agreement or any 
part thereof without the consent of the Postmaster General signified in writing under 
his hand or under the hand of the secretary or one of the assistant secretaries of the 
Post Office and in case of the same or any part thereof being assigned underlet or 
otherwise disposed of or of any great or habitual breach of this Agreement or of any 
covenant matter or thing herein contained on the part of the Contractors their officers 
agents or servants and whether there be or be not any penalty or sum of money paya¬ 
ble by the Contractors for any breach it shall be lawful for the Postmaster General if 
he shall think fit (and notwithstanding there may or may not have been any former 
breach of this Contract) by writing under his hand or under the hand of the secretary 
or one of the assistant secretaries of the Post Office to determine this Agreement with¬ 
out any previous notice to the Contractors or their agents nor shall the Contractors be 
entitled to any compensation in respect of such determination and such determination 

007—11 



162 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


shall not deprive the Postmaster General for the time being of any right or remedy to 
which he would otherwise be entitled by reason of such breach or any prior breach of 
such Contract. 

25. If on the determination of this Agreement any vessel or vessels shall have started 
or shall start with the mails in conformity with this Agreement such voyage or voyages 
shall be continued and performed and the mails be delivered and received during the 
s'ame as if this Agreement had remained in force with regard to any such vessels and 
services and with respect to such vessels and services as last aforesaid this Agreement 
shall be considered as having terminated when such vessels shall have reached their 
port or place of destination and such services shall have been performed and the Con¬ 
tractors shall receive the same remuneration in respect of each such voyage as if this 
Agreement had continued in full f rce until the termination thereof. 

26. It shall be lawful for the Postmaster General from time to time to delegate all 
or any of the powers vested in him by virtue of these presents to such person or per- 
sons as he shall think tit. 

27. All notices or directions which the Postmaster General his officers agents or 
others are hereby authorised to give to the Contractors their officers servants or agents 
other than any notice of termination of this Contract may at the option of the Post¬ 
master General his officers agents or others either be delivered to-the master of any 
of the said vessels or any other officer or agent of the Contractors in the charge or 
management of any vessel employed in the performance of this Agreement or left for 
the Contractors at their office or last known office in Liverpool and any notices or 
directions so given or left shall be binding on the Contractors. Provided always that 
any notice of termination of this Contract shall be served on the Contractors their 
officers servants or agents at their office or last known office in Liverpool. 

28. In pursuance of the provisions contained in the Act of Parliament passed in the 
22nd year of the reign of King George the Third intituled “An Act for restraining any 
person concerned in any Contract Commission or Agreement made for the public service 
from being elected or sitting and voting as a Member of the House of Commons” no 
Member of the House of Commons shall be admitted to any share or part of this 
Agreement or to any benefit to arise therefrom contrary to the true intent and mean¬ 
ing of the said Act. 

29. This Agreement shall not be binding until it has lain upon the Tableof the House 
of the Commons for one month without disapproval unless it be previously approved 
by a resolution of the said House of Commons. 

30. And lastly for the due and faithful performance of all and singular the coven¬ 
ants conditions provisoes clauses articles and agreements hereinbefore contained which 
on the part and behalf of the Contractors are or ought to be observed performed 
fulfilled or kept the said William Inman Thomas Langton Birley and Charles Inman 
do hereby bind themselves their heirs executors and administrators and each of them 
doth hereby bind himself his heirs executors and administrators unto our Sovereign 
Lady the Queen in the sum of 5,000 l.-of lawful British money to be paid to our said 
Lady the Queen her heirs and successors by way of stipulated or ascertained damages 
agreed upon between the said Postmaster General and the said William Inman Thomas 
Langton Birley and Charles Inman over and above any other sum or sums if any 
whi« h may be payable in case of the failure of the said Contractors in the due execu¬ 
tion of this Agreement or any part thereof. 

In witness whereof the said parties to these presents have hereunto set their hands 
and seals the the day and year first above written. 

MONTROSE. [l. s. ] 

T LANGTON BIRLEY. [l. s.l 

WILLIAM INMAN. [l. s.] 

CHAS. INMAN. [L- s.] 

Signed sealed and delivered by the witliin-named James Duke of Montrose Her 
Majesty’s Postmaster General in the presence of— 
j. L. Du Plat Taylor 

Private Secretary. 

Signed sealed and delivered by the within-named William Inman in the presence 

of— 

J. D. Rich 

Controller Post Office Liverpool. 

Signed sealed and delivered by the within-named Thomas Langton Birley in the 
presence of— 

J. D. Rich 

Controller Post Office Liverpool. 

Signed sealed and delivered by the within-named Charles Inman in the presence 
J. D. Rich 

Controller Post Office Liverpool. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


163 


No. 3. 


North American Mails. 

Articles of Agreement made the 3rd day of December in the year of our Lord 1867 
between the Most Noble James Duke of Montrose Her Majesty’s Postmaster General 
(tor and on behalf of Her Majesty) of the one part and Sir Edward Cuuard of New 
York in the United States of America Baronet John Burns of Glasgow in that part 
ot Great Britain called Scotland Merchant and Charles Maclver of Liverpool in the 
County Palatine of Lancaster Merchant hereinafter designated “the Contractors’ 
of the other part. 

Witness that in consideration of the payments hereinafter stipulated to be made to 
the Contractors the Contractors do for themselves their heirs executors and adminis¬ 
trators and each and every of them for himself his heirs executors and administrators 
doth hereby covenant promise and agree to and with Her Majesty’s Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral his executors administrators successors and assigns Her Majesty’s Postmaster 
General for the time being in manner following (that is to say):— 

1. The Contractors their executors and administrators shall and will during the con¬ 
tinuance of this Contract diligently faithfully and to the satisfaction of the said Post¬ 
master General for the time being and with all possible speed convey Her Majesty’s 
Mails (in which designation all bags boxes or packets of letters newspapers books or 
printed papers and all other articles transmissible by the post without regard either 
to the place to which they may be addressed or to that iu which they may have origi¬ 
nated and all empty bags empty boxes and other stores and articles used or to be used 
in carrying on the Post Office service which shall be sent by or to or from the Post 
Office are agreed to be comprehended) which shall at any time or times and from time 
to time by Her Majesty’s Postmaster General or any of the officers or agents of the said 
Postmaster General be required to be conveyed between England and North America 
as hereinaiter mentioned by means of a sufficient number of good substantial ami 
efficient steam vessels. 

2. The Contractors their executors or administrators shall and will for the perform¬ 
ance of the services between England and North America at all times at their own 
cost provide and keep seaworthy audin complete repair from the commencement and 
during the continuance of this Contract a sufficient number of good substantial and 
efficient steam vessels and at the like cost adequately provide and furnish all and every 
the vessels to be and while employe i iu the performance of this Contract with all 
necessary and proper tackle stores oil tallow fuel provisions machinery engines anchors 
cables boats lire pumps and all other proper and requisite means for extinguishing 
fire lightui g conductors charts chronometers proper nautical instruments and all 
other furniture and apparel and whatsoever else may be requisite and necessary for 
equipping the said vessels and rendering them constant.y efficient for the said serv¬ 
ices. 

3. Each and every of the said vessels shall at the like cost be manned with compe¬ 
tent officers with appropriate certificates granted pursuant to the Act 17 & 18 Viet. c. 
104 or to the Actor Acts in force for the time being relative to the granting certificates 
to officers in the merchant service and also with competent engineers and a sufficient 
crew of able seamen and other men and with a competent surgeon to be subject to the 
approval of the Postmaster General. 

4. From and after the 1st day of January 1868 and thenceforward during the con¬ 
tinuance of this Contract one of such vessels so equipped and manned with Her Maj- 
esty’s mails on board shall on every Saturday at such hour as the said Postmaster 
General shall at any time or from time to time appoint proceed from Liverpool afore¬ 
said without loss of time to New York in the said United States and another of such 
vessels with Her Majesty’s mails on board shall on every Wednesday at such hour as 
the said Postmaster General shall at any time or from time to time appoint proceed 
from New York aforesaid to Liverpool aforesaid. 

5. Each of the said vessels proceeding from or returning to Liverpool shall call and 
receive and deliver mails at Queenstown iu Ireland. 

6. The said Postmaster General for the time being shall be at Liberty and have full 
power from time to time without making any compensation to the Conti actors to a ltei 
the day and hour for the said vessels leaving all and every or any of the said places 
from-whence the said mails are to be conveyed on giving three months notice in 
writing under his hand or the hand of the secretary or one of the assistant secretaries 
of the Post Office to the Contractors their executors or administrators. It being never¬ 
theless expressly understood that? the said Postmaster General or any of his officers or 
agents shall be'at liberty and have full power at any time during the continuance of 
this Contract to direct that any one or moie of such vessels so conveying Her Majesty’s 
mails from any of the said ports or places shall delay her or their departure for any 
period not exceeding 24 hours beyond the period which may have been previously 


164 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


fixed for the departure of such vessel or vessels and a letter addressed to the com¬ 
mander of tKb vessel so to be delayed shall be a sufficient authority for such detention. 

7. The Contractors shall provide at their own cost on board each of the vessels to 
be employed under this Agreement to the satisfaction of the Postmaster General a 
proper and convenient place of deposit for the mails with secure lock and key and also 
a separate and convenient room for the purpose of sorting and making up the mails 
and shall provide in such room all such furniture lamps fittings and other conveniences 
as shall be necessary and all such furniture lamps fittings and other conveniences 
shall be from time to time cleansed and kept in repair and the oil tor the lamps sup¬ 
plied by the servants and at the cost of the Contractors and the services of the crew 
shall from time to time be given for the conveyance of the mails between the mail 
room and the sorting room. 

8. The Contractors their executors and administrators shall receive and allow to re¬ 
main on board on each of the vessels to be employed in the performance of this Con¬ 
tract- while they are so employed and also while remaining at any port or place to or 
from which .mails are to be conveyed under this agreement whether any such vessel 
shall for the time being b6 with or without mails on boar d an officer to be appointed 
by the Postmaster General to take charge of Her Majesty’s mails and also such other 
officers in the service of the Postmaster General as shall be reasonably required for the 
purpose of sorting such mails during the voyage of such vessel. 

9. A suitable first-class berth with appropriate bed bedding and furniture shall at 
the cost of the Contractors their executors and administrators be provided and ap¬ 
propriated by them for the exclusive use and accommodation of the officer for the time 
being in charge of the said mails and such officer shall be victualled by the Contract¬ 
ors their executors and administrators as a chief cabin passenger without any charge 
either for his passage or victualling and the Contractors their executors and admin¬ 
istrators, shall'also at their own cost provide suitable berths for the accommodation 
as fore-cabin passengers of the other officers employed to sort and make up the said 
mails and such last-mentioned officers shall be duly victualled by the Contractors their 
executors and administrators as fore-cabin passengers without any charge being made 
either for their passage or victualling. 

10. If the said Postmaster General shall at any time during the continuance of this 
Contract think fit to entrust the charge and custody of Her Majesty’s mails to the com¬ 
mander or commanders of all or any of the vessels to be employed in the performance 
of this Contract such commander or commanders shall take due care thereof and shall 
make the usual declarations required or which may hereafter from time to time or at 
any time be required by Her Majesty’s Postmaster General in such or similar cases 
and furnish such journals returns and information to and perform such services as 
the Postmaster General or his agents may require and such commander or commanders 
having the charge of such mails shall immediately on the arrival at any of the said 
ports and places of any vessel so conveying the said mails himself deliver Her Majesty’s 
mails into the hands of the postmaster of the port or place where such mails are to be 
delivered, or into the hands of such other person as the Postmaster General shall au¬ 
thorise and direct to receive the same. 

11. The contractors shall not convey in any of the vessels employed under this 
agreement any nitro-glycerine or other article which shall have been legally declared 
specially dangerous. 

12. At each and every of the said ports or places where any of the said vessels are 
to proceed the said officer or such other person ha ving or authorised to have the charge 
of the said mails shall whenever and as often as deemed by him practicable or nec¬ 
essary be conveyed on shore and also from the shore to the steam vessel employed for 
the time being in the performance of this Contract together with or (if the duty of 
such officer or person renders it necessary) without Her Majesty’s mails in a suitable 
boat of not less than four oars to be provided and properly manned and equipped by 
the Contractors. 

13. If any vessel having Her Majesty’s mails on board shall stop linger or deviate 
from the direct course on her voyage or shall delay starting at exact time or shall 
put back into port after start ing then and in each and every of such cases and as often 
asthe same shall happen the Contractors their executors and administrators shall and 
will pay unto Her Majesty her heirs and successors the sum of 100 l, and if a vessel 
which ought to leave Liverpool for New York in the performance of this Contract 
shall not proceed on her voyage for 1*2 hours after the proper and appointed time the 
Contractors their executors and administrators shall and will so often as any such 
omission shall happen pay unto Her Majesty her heirs and successors the sum of 500?. 
and also the further sum of 500 /. for every successive period of 12 hours which shall 
elapse until such vessel shall proceed on her voyage in the performance of this Contract. 
Provided always that if it shall be shown to the satisfaction of the Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral that such delay or deviation or such failure to start was caused by circumstances 
not within the control of the Contractors the payment of the said penalties shall not 
be enforced. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


165 


14. fhe Contractors and all commanding and other officers of the vessels to be em¬ 
ployed iu the performance of this Contract and all agents seamen and servants of the 
Contractors shall at all times during the continuance of this Contract punctually at¬ 
tend to the orders and directions of the said Postmaster General or of any of his officers 
or agents as to the mode time and place of landing delivering and receiving mails. 

15. All and every the sums of money hereby stipulated to be paid by the Contractors 
their executors or administrators unto Her Majesty her heirs and successors shall be 
considered as stipulated or ascertained damages and should the same or any of them 
become payable and not be discharged forthwith on the application of the said Post¬ 
master General or his agents each and every of such sums of money may be deducted 
and retained by the said Postmaster General out of the monies payable to the Contract¬ 
ors their executors or administrators under this contract or the payment thereof en¬ 
forced with full costs of suit at the discretion of the said Postmaster General. 

16. fhe Contractors shall and will when and as often as iu writing they or the 
masteis or commanders of their respective vessels shall be required so to do by the 
said Postmaster'General or by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty or by any 
officers or agents acting on his or their authority (such writing to specify the rank 
or description of the person or persons to be conveyed and the accommodation to be 
provided tor him or them) receive provide for victual and convey on board each and 
every or any of the vessels to be employed in the performance of this Contract (in ad¬ 
dition to the officers or other persons authorized to have the charge of the said mails 
and to sort and make up the same) any officers in the Navy Army or Civil Service of 
Her Majesty not exceeding four in auy one ship as chief cabin passengers with their 
wives and families and any persons not exceeding four in any one ship as fore-cabin 
passengers with their wives and families together with servants of both chief and fore 
cabin passengers and any number of seamen marines soldiers or artificers notexceeding 
10 in any one ship with tlieir wives and families as deck passengers to be always pro¬ 
vided with adequate protection from rain sun and bad weather and not exposed on 
deck without such competent shelter as long notice as practicable being given to the 
Contractors when accommodation shall be required for the wives or children of such 
officers or other persons. 

17. Commissioned officers their wives and families shall be considered as chief cabin 
passengers non-commissioned officers their wives and families as fore cabin passen¬ 
gers and seamen marines private soldiers artificers and their wives and families as 
deck passengers and the said servants (in respect of accommodation) as the servants 
of chief cabin passengers. 

18. Each field officer and every naval officer of equal or superior rank shall be al¬ 
lowed 90 cubic feet of space in measurement for baggage provided (except in the case 
of the Royal Engineers such allowance shall not exceed 18 cwt. iu weight and all other 
officers in Her Majesty’s Naval and Military Service and officers in the Civil Service 
60 cubic feet each and that (except in the case of the Royal Engineers) such allowance 
shall not exceed 12 cwt. in weight. 

19. The Royal Engineers shall be allowed the same measurement but to extend in 
weight to 27 cwt. for field officers and 18 cwt. for every other officer of the Royal En-~ 
gineers. 

20. Soldiers of the Royal Artillery and Sappers and Miners and their wives shall be 
allowed six cubic feet each for baggage and all married officers when accompanied by 
their wives or families a further allowance notexceeding one-half of that before men¬ 
tioned according to their rank and corps. 

21. For every company of the Royal Artillery embarked there shall be conveyed free 
of all charge the proper proportion of light field pieces if required and auy hammocks 
and beddiug which maybe sent out for thereof the troops or other persons embarked 
shall be placed in charge of the officer authorised to have charge of Her Majesty’s mails 
and be brought back to England if required free of any charge for freight. 

22. The victualling of officers their wives and families conveyed as chief cabin 
passengers shall be the same as is usually allowed by the Contractors to chief cabin 
passengers their wives and families the victualling of non-commissioned officers 
their wives and families conveyed as fore cabin passengers shall be the same as is 
allowed to the boatswain and carpenter of the Contractors’ steamships and the vic¬ 
tualling of seamen marines soldiers and artificers their wives and families con¬ 
veyed as deck passengers shall be the same as is allowed to the seamen of the Con¬ 
tractors’ steam ships and the victualling of the servants of officers whether chief cr 
fore cabin passengers shall be the same as the servants of other chief and fore cabin 
passengers. 

23. The passage money shall be paid (in full of all charges for mess including a 
pint of port or good foreign white wine and one bottle of malt liquor per day for each 
officer conveyed as a chief cabin passenger and one gill of spirits for each non-com¬ 
missioned officer seaman marine soldier artificer and servant conveyed as a fore cabin 
or deck passenger at and after the rates mentioned in the following table : 


166 AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Table of rates of passage. 



Chief Cabin Passengers. 

Fore 

Cabin Passengers. Deck Passengers. 




a <p c'a 

V S 4) w 

0 ) ™ 50 

1 > fe t- 

-5^ £ S 



g g S*o 

® <d m 

> > 53 

<m . £> r* 


2 ® 

•P 1 

2. <M 

tH • 

« o 

|1 


S 

o 

£ 

O 

Lady. 

Children 
8 and 
of Age. 
Children 
3 and 8 
Age. 

a 

cs 

Woman. 

Children 
8 and 1 

of Age 

| Children 

3 and 8 

1 Age. 

• Man. 

Woman. 

1 

Children 

8 and 
of Age 

1 Children 

3 and 8 

Age. 


S. 

&/• 6 *. 

£.. & £. s. 

.£. 6 *. 

£. s. 

,£. s. £. s. £. s. 

£. s. 

£. 8. 

£. 8. 

Rate from Liverpool to 
New York. . 

30 - 

26 - 

12 10 6 5 

20 - 

20 - 

10 - 5 - 10 - 

10 - 

4 10 

2 10 

Rate from New York to 
Liverpool. . 

30 - 

24 - 

12 - 6 - 

15 - 

i 15 - 

7 10 3 15 10 - 

i 

10 - 

4 10 

2 10 


Memorandum.—C hildren under three years of age to be carried free, and male servants to be charged 
one-half, and female servants two-thirds of the rates charged for the officers. 


24. The payment of the passage ordered at the expense ot the public lor any per¬ 
son shall only be made on the production of the order for the passage and ot a cer¬ 
tificate from the person in the following form namely 

“ T hereby certify that on the-I embarked at-as a-passen¬ 
ger on board the mail steam packet-for a passage to-and landed at 

-on the-’’ . 

To this c rtiiicate the following addition is to be made in every case of a male cabin 

passenger namely 

“ I further certify that the first dinner meal taken on board was on the- 

and the last dinner meal on the- 

“ Dated this --day of- 

And the correctness of the dates must be corroborated by the master of the packet 
adding underneath the passenger’s signature. 

“ The dates inserted in this certificate are correct. 

(Signature) — 1 - 

u Master of the racket ” 

25. The passage money for the families and wives of officers shall be pa id to the 
Contractors by the officers themselves at rates never exceeding those contained in the 
before-mentioned table. 

2(1. The passengers herein-before mentioned or referred to are to be exclusive of any 
men to be sent home under the provisions of the Act 11 Geo. 4, c. 20, the rate of pas¬ 
sage for whom is to be and to be paid for in accordance with the provisions of that Act. 

27. Whenever the Contractors shall convey any soldiers as deck passengers other 
than those specially provided for by this Contract the Contractors shall provide them 
with adequate protection from rain sun and bad weather and they shall not be ex¬ 
posed on deck without competent shelter. 

28. 'fhe Contractors their executors or administrators shall and will receive on board 
each and every of the said vessels employed in the performance of this Contract 
any number of small packages containing astronomical instruments charts medi¬ 
cines wearing apparel or other articles and convey the same to and from and be¬ 
tween all or any of the said ports or places to or from which Her Majesty’s mails are 
to lie conveyed in the performance of this contract when and as often as directed by 
the said Postmaster General or the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty or his or their 
agents duly authorised, free from all costs and charges and also shall and will re¬ 
ceive on board each and every of the said vessels and convey to and from and be¬ 
tween all or any of the same ports or places any naval or other stores not exceeding 
five tons in weight at any time at the usual rate of freight charged by the Contract¬ 
ors for private goods (but which shall never be more than after the rate of 5 1. per 
ton) on receiving from the said Postmaster General or the Lords Commissioners of the 
Admiralty or any of his or their officers or agents two days’ previous notice of its 
being his or their intention to have such stores so conveyed. 

29. And the said Postmaster-General in consideration of the premises and of the 
Contractors their executors and administrators and their officers servants and agents 
at all times during the continuance of this contract strictly and punctually perform¬ 
ing the services herein-before contracted to be performed and the covenants and 
agreements hereby entered into by them the Contractors doth for and on behalf of 
Her Majesty Her heirs and successors agree with the Contractors their executors and 





























AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


167 


administrators that the said Postmaster General on behalf of Her Majesty will pay 
or cause to be paid to the Contractors their executors and administrators (out of such 
aides or supplies as may be from time to time provided and appropriated by Parlia¬ 
ment lor that purpose) a sum alter the rate of 80,000/. per annum by quarterly pay¬ 
ments and with a proportionate part thereof should such respective services terminate 
on any other day than a day of quarterly payment the first quarterly payment to be¬ 
come due on the first day of April 1868. Provided always that the amount of all 
sums of money which the Contractors may and ought to receive from the Postmaster- 
General of the United States or from any other person in respect of the conveyance 
by the Contractors during the continuance of this Contract of any mails from New 
York to Queenstown and Liverpool shall be paid over by the Contractors to Her 
Majesty’s Postmaster General or may be deducted by Her Majesty’s Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral from any payments from time to time to become due to the Contractors in pursu¬ 
ance of this Agreement. 

.10. And it is hereby agreed and declared that this Contract shall commence on the 
1st day of January 1868 and shall continue in force until the 31st day of December 
186b and shall then determine but not so as to prevent either of the said parties 
availing themselves of this Contract for recovering any sum or sums of money or 
damages should there have been any breach of this Contract previously to such de¬ 
termination. 

31. The Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty shall at anytime during the con¬ 
tinuance of this Contract if they shall consider it necessary for the public interest 
have power and be at liberty to purchase all or any of the said vessels at a valuation 
or to charter the same exclusively for Her Majesty’s service at a rate of hire to be 
mutually fixed and agreed on by them and the said Contractors but if any difference 
should at any time or times arise as to the amount of valuation or hire so to be paid 
such difference shall be referred to two arbitrators one to be chosen by the said 
Commissioners and the other by the Contractors or to an umpire to be chosen by 
such arbitrators before they proceed with the reference to them and the said Com¬ 
missioners in the case of hiring any such vessel shall return the same to the Con¬ 
tractors in the same state and condition as she was in at the time of any such hiring 
reasonable wear and tear excepted and if any difference should arise upon that point 
the same shall be settled in the same manner as the amount for the hiring is to be 
settled in case of difference And it is further agreed that in case of such purchase or 
hire the service hereby contracted to be performed shall be performed by other ves¬ 
sels of the Contractors of a similar description to the vessel or vessels purchased or 
hired if they can in due and proper time furnish them and in the event of the said 
Contractors being allowed by the Postmaster General to continue to perform only a 
portion of the service there shall be paid to the said Contractors such sum of money 
as shall be agreed upon by the said Postmaster General and the said Contractors and 
in case of their differing as to the amount the difference to be settled by two arbitra¬ 
tors or an umpire to be chosen respectively by the said Postmaster General and the 
Contractors in manner aforesaid and the joint and concurrent award of the said arbitra¬ 
tors or the separate award of the said umpire when the said arbitrators cannot agree 
shall be binding and conclusive upon both parties and it is hereby agreed that any 
submission which may be made to arbitration in pursuance of this Contract shall be 
made a rule of Her Majesty’s Court of Exchequer pursuant to the Statute in that 
case made and provided and that any witnesses examined upon any reference may be 
■examined upon oath. 

32. And it is hereby agreed that if at any time, and so long as the Contractors shall 
make it appear to the satifaction of the Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury for 
the time being (but not otherwise) that from any change in the relations between 
this kingdom and any foreign State or from war or other causes distinctly of a 
public and national character to be judged of by the same Commissioners the rate 
of insurance for steam vessels and the freight payable by the Contractors for coals 
which may be used in the performance of this Contract and the rate of insurance on 
such coals shall have been raised above the rates actually payable for the same at the 
date of this Contract the Contractors shall be paid an additional sum of money ac¬ 
cording to the increase of the said rates but the said additional sum of money for 
freight shall be paid in respect of 40,000 tons of coal per annum and no more and the 
amount of any additional sum of money to be paid in any case or under any circum¬ 
stances either for insurance and freight or otherwise shall not exceed the rate of 
40,000 /. per annum but in no case whatever shall any additional sum be paid unless it 
shall have been proved to the satisfaction of the said Commissioners that such addi¬ 
tional expenses equal to the amount claimed have been actually and bona-fide in¬ 
curred and paid by the Contractors. 

33. And it is hereby further agreed and provided that the Contractors their ex¬ 
ecutors or administrators shall not assign underlet or otherwise dispose of this 
Contract or any part thereof and that in case of the same or any part thereof 
heinsr assigned underlet or otherwise disposed of or ol any breach of this Contract 

O c"} A 


168 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


on the part of the Contractors their executors or administrators it shall be law¬ 
ful for the said Postmaster General if he think lit and notwithstanding there may 
or may not have been any former breach of this Contract by writing under his 
hand or under the hand of the secretary or one of the assistant secretaries of the 
Post Off! ce for the time being to determine this contract without any previous notice 
to the Contractors their executors or administrators or their agents nor shall the 
Contractors their executors or administrators be entitled to any compensation in 
-consequence of such determination but even if this Contract be so determined the 
payment of the sum of money hereinafter agreed to be made shall be enforced should 
the same be not duly paid by the Contractors. 

34. And it is also agreed that the notices or directions which the Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral or his officers agents or other persons are hereby authorised and empowered to 
give to the Contractors their executors or administrators officers servants or agents 
may at the option of the Postmaster General or his officers agents or other persons 
be either delivered to the master or commander or other officer agent or servant 
of the Contractors their executors or administrators in the charge or management 
of any vessel to be or while employed in the performance of this Contract or be 
left at the last known place of business or abode in England or Scotland or America 
either of the said Sir Edward Cunard or John Burns or Charles Maclver their execu¬ 
tors or administrators And any notices or directions so given or left shall be as 
binding on the said Sir Edward Cunard John Burns and Charles Maclver their exec¬ 
utors or administrators as if duly served upon or left with them. 

35. And it is hereby agreed that if when this Contract or any part thereof termi¬ 
nates any vessel or vessels should have started or should start with the mails in con¬ 
formity with this; Contract such voyage or voyages shall be continued and performed 
and the mails be delivered and received during the same as if this Contract remained 
in force with regard to any such vessels and services but the Contractors shall not be- 
entitled to any payment or compensation for the same. 

36. And in pursuance of the directions contained in a certain Act of Parliament 
made and passed in the 22nd year of the reign of King George the Third intituled 
u An Act for restraining any Person concerned in any Contract Commission or Agree¬ 
ment made for the public Service from being elected or sitting and voting as a 
Member of the House of Commons” it is hereby expressly declared and agreed and 
these presents are upon this express condition and the Contractors do covenant for 
themselves their heirs executors and administrators that no Member of the House of 
Commons shall be admitted to any share or part of this Contract or agreement or to 
any benefit to arise therefrom contrary to the true intent and meaning of the said 
Act. 

37. And lastly for the due and faithful performance of all and singular the cove¬ 
nants conditions provisoes clauses articles and agreement hereinbefore contained 
which on the part and behalf of the Contractors their heirs executors and adminis¬ 
trators are or ought to be observed performed fulfilled or kept the said Sir Edward 
Cunard John Burns and Charles Maclver do hereby bind themselves their heirs exec¬ 
utors and administrators and each of them doth hereby bind himself his heirs execu¬ 
tors and administrators unto our Sovereign Lady the Queen in the sum of 25,000 /. of 
lawful British money to be paid to our said Lady the Queen Her heirs and successors 
by way of stipulated or ascertained damages agreed upon between the said Postmas¬ 
ter General and the said Sir Edward Cunard John Burns and Charles Maclver (over 
and above any other sum or slims if any which may be payable) in case of the failure 
of the said Sir Edward Cunard John Burns and Charles Maclver their heirs executors 
or administrators in the due execution of this Contract or any part thereof. 

In witness whereof the said parties to these presents have hereunto set their hands 
and seals the day and year first above written. 


MONTROSE, [l. s.] 

Signed sealed and delivered by the within-named James Duke of Montrose Her 
Majesty’s Postmaster General in the presence of 
J. L. Du Plat Taylor, 

Private Secretary. 

Signed sealed and delivered by the within-named Sir Edward Cunard in the pres¬ 
ence of 


JOHN BURNS, [l. s.] 

Signed sealed and delivered by the within-named John Burns in the presence of 
Edwin Winter, 

Solicitor’s Department, General Post Office, London . 

Signed sealed and delivered by the witliin-named Charles Maclver in the presence 






AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


169 


No. 4. 


Contract of 4 December 18(57. 

HALIFAX MAILS. 

Articles of Agreement made the 4t.li day of December in the year of our Lord 1867 
between the Most Noble James Duke of Montrose Her Majesty’s Postmaster General 
for the time being of the first part William Inman of Liverpool in the county of 
Lancaster (which said William Inman and his executors and administrators are 
hereinafter described “the Contractors”) of the second part and Thomas Langton 
^ Birley of Carr Hill Ivirkham in the county of Lancaster Esquire and Charles 
Inman of Liverpool aforesaid of the third part witness that the said William 
Inman for himself his heirs executors and administrators doth hereby covenant 
with the Postmaster General his executors administrators successors and assigns 
Her Majesty’s Postmaster General for the time being in manner following (that, is 
to say):— 

1. 1 he Contractors will faithfully convey or cause to be conveyed by good and suf¬ 
ficient steam vessels all Her Majesty’s mails (which designation shall for the purposes 
of this Contract be considered as including all bags boxes or packets of letters news¬ 
papers books or printed papers and all other articles transmissible by post without 
regard either to the place to which they may be addressed or to that in which they 
may have originated) also all empty bags empty boxes and other stores and articles 
used or to be used in carrying on the Post Office service which shall be sent by or to 
or from the Post Office which the Postmaster General or any of his officers or agents 
shall require to be conveyed during the months of January February March April May 
and June 1868 from the port of Queenstown in Ireland to the port of Halifax in Nova 
Scotia on every alternate Suuday and from Halifax to Queenstown on every alternate 
Friday at such hours as the Postmaster General shall appoint and shall and will at 
their own costs and charges duly receive and safely deliver such Her Majesty’s mails- 
at Queenstown and Halifax respectively. 

2. The Contractors will on Sunday the 5th day of January 1868 and thenceforward 
on every alternate Sunday during the continuance of this Contract at such hour as- 
the Postmaster General shall •ppoiut provide at the said port of Queenstown a good 
and sufficient steam vessel iu every respect ready for sea for the conveyance of the 
said mails and such vessel shall immediately after Her Majesty’s mails are put on 
board proceed without loss of time direct to Halifax and will on Friday the 3rd day 
of January 1868 and thenceforward on every alternate Friday during the cont inuance 
of this Contract at such hour as the Postmaster General shall appoint provide at the 
said port of Halifax a good and sufficient steam vessel in every respect ready for sea 
for the conveyance of the said mails and such vessel shall immediately after Her 
Majesty’s mails are put on board proceed without loss of time direct to Queenstown 
and every such voyage from Queenstown to Halifax or from Halifax to Queenstown 
shall be completed within the period of 288 hours. 

3. A separate and secure place of sufficient size protected from leakage and under 
lock and key shall be provided in each of such steam vessels for the deposit and safe 
custody of Her Majesty's mails and the place so provided shall be subject to the ap¬ 
proval of the [Postmaster General for the time # being or of such person as he shall 
appoint to inspect and approve the same and the masters or commanders of such 
vessels shall take due care of and the Contractors shall be responsible for the receipt 
and delivery of the said mails and each of such masters or commanders shall make 
the usual declaration or declarations required or which may hereafter lie required by 
the Postmaster General in such and similar cases and furnish such journals returns 
and information to and perform such services as the Postmaster General or his agents 
may require and every such master or commander or officer duly authorised by him 
having the charge of mails shall immediately on the arrival at Halifax or Queenstown 
of every such vessel deliver all mails into the hands of the Postmaster or such other 
person at such places respectively as the Postmaster General shall authorise to receive 
the same. 

4. The Contractors shall not convey in any of the vessels employed under this 
Agreement any nitro-glycerine or other article which shall have been legally declared 
specially dangerous. 

5. The Contractors and all commanding and other officers of the vessels employed 
in the performance of this Agreement-and all agents seamen and servants of the Con¬ 
tractors shall at all times punctually attend to the orders and directions of the Post¬ 
master General his officers or agents as to the mode time and place of landing delivering 
and receiving mails. 

6. All the costs and charges of providing the vessels to be employed under this 
Contract and the furniture and tackle thereof and the keeping the same vessels sea- 


% 


170 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


worthy and in repair and all the salaries and wages of the officers seamen and servants 
employed in or about the management thereof and all the sea and other risks port 
charges duties pilotage insurances and every other expense whatever relative to the 
same shall be wholly paid and borne by the Contractors. 

7. The Contractors shall not receive or take or permit or suffer to be received or 
taken on board any or either of such vessels any letters for conveyance other than 
such a<s shall be contained in Her Majesty’s mails save and except such letters as are 
by law exempt from the exclusive privilege of the Postmaster General nor any mails 
for conveyance on behalf of any colony or foreign country without the consent of the 
Postmaster General and in case of any such default respectively the Contractors shall 
be liable to be proceeded against for a breach of this Agreement. 

8. And in consideration of the due and faithful performance by the Contractors of 
all the services hereby contracted to be by them performed the Postmaster General 
doth hereby covenant that there shall be paid to the Contractors (out of such aids or 
supplies as maybe provided and appropriated by Parliamen 1 for that purpose) for 
each voyage with the mails under this Agreement from Queenstown to Halifax or 
from Halifax to Queenstown the sum of 375 1. 

9. It shall be lawful for the Postmaster General by writing under his hand or under 
the hand of the Secretary or one of the Assistant Secretaries of the Post Office at any 
time to determine and put an end to this Agreement without any previous notice in 
case of the breach thereof in any respeet by the Contractors and the Contractors shall 
not be entitled to any compensation by reason of such determination and such deter¬ 
mination shall not deprive the Postmaster General of any right or remedy to which 
he would otherwise be entitled by reason of such breach or any prior breach of this 
Agreement nor shall it interfere with the completion of any voyage which may have 
been commenced at the time of such determination. 

10. If at the expiration of the month of June 1868 any vessel or vessels shall have 
been started with the mails from Queenstown or Halifax under this Agreement such 
vessel or vessels shall deliver such mails in conformity with this Agreement which 
shall be considered to terminate on the arrival of such last-mentioned vessel or vessels 
at Halifax or Queenstown. 

11. All notices or directions which the Postmaster General his officers agents or 
others are hereby authorized to give to the Contractors their officers servants or agents 
may either be delivered to the master or commander of any of the said vessels or other 
officer or agent of the Contractors in the charge or management of any vessel employed 
in the performance of this Agreement or left for the Contractors or sent by post ad¬ 
dressed to them at their office or house of business in Liverpool or any other place and 
being so given or left shall be binding on the Contractors but any notice of termina¬ 
tion of this Contract shall be served on the Contractors their officers servants or 
agents at their office or last known office in Liverpool. 

12. The Contractors shall not assign underlet or otherwise part or dispose of this 
agreement or any part thereof without the consent of the Postmaster General in 
writing for that purpose. 

13. In pursuance of the directions contained in the act of Parliament passed in the 
22nd year of the reign of King George the 3rd intituled “An Act for restraining any 
person concerned in any contract commission or agreement made for the public serv¬ 
ice from being elected, or sitting and voting as a member of the House of Com¬ 
mons” no Member of the House of Commons shall be admitted to any share or part 
of this agreement or to any benefit Jo arise therefrom contrary to the true intent and 
meaning of the said act. 

14. And lastly for the due and faithful performance of all and singular the cove¬ 
nants conditions provisoes clauses articles and agreements hereinbefore contained, 
which on the part and behalf of the Contractors are or ought to be observed per¬ 
formed fulfilled and kept the said William Inman Thomas Langton Birley and 
Charles Inman do hereby bind themselves their heirs executors and administrators 
and each of them doth hereby bind himself his heirs executors and administrators 
unto our Sovereign Lady the Queen in the sum of 5,000 l. of lawful money of the 
United Kingdom to be paid to our said Lady the Queen her heirs and successors by 
way of stipulated or ascertained damages hereby agreed upon between the Postmaster 
General and the said William Inman Thomas Langton Birley and Charles Inman in 
case of the failure on the part of the Contractors in the due execution of this Agree¬ 
ment or any part thereof. 

In witness whereof the said parties to these presents have hereunto set their hands 
and seals the day and year first above written. 

MONTROSE, [l. s.] 

Signed sealed and delivered by the within-named 
James Duke of Montrose Her Majesty’s Postmaster 
General in the presence of 

J. L. Du Plat Taylor, 

Private Secretary. 


WILLIAM INMAN. 


[L. S.] 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


171 


Signed sealed and delivered by tlie within-named 
William Inman in the presence of 
J. D. Rich, 

Controller , Post OfficeLiverpool. 

Signed sealed and delivered by the within-named 
Thomas Langton Birley in the presence of 
J. D. Rich, 

Controller , Poet Office, Liverpool. 

Signed sealed and delivered by the within-named 
Charles Inman in the presence of 
J. D. Rich. 

Controller, Post Office, Liverpool . 


T. LANGTON BIRLEY. [l. s.] 


CHAS. INMAN. [l. s.] 


No. 5. ™ 

Copy of Treasury Minute, dated 5 December 1867. 

Let copies of the Contracts entered into between the Postmaster General and the 
North German Lloyd, the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steam Ship Com¬ 
pany and Messrs. Cunard Burns and Maclver, for the conveyance of mails to New 
York, and also of the Contract entered into between the Postmaster General and the 
Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steam Ship Company for the conveyance of 
mails to Halifax, be laid upon the Table of the House of Commons. 

Let copies also of the Correspondence relating to the conveyance of these mails, 
which sufficiently sets forth the grounds upon which my Lords have authorized the 
above-named Contracts, be laid upon the Table of the House. 


No. 6. 

The Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 

General Post Office, 8 February 1866. 

My Lords: The contract made by the Admiralty with Messrs. Cunard, Burns and 
Maclver, on the 24th June 1858, for the conveyance of the North American and Ba¬ 
hamas mails can be terminated in January 1868, if 12 months’ notice be given to the 
contractors immediately after the 1st January 1867; and, as it appears to me desi¬ 
rable to submit this service to public competition, 1 request the authority of your 
Lordships for informing Messrs. Cunard, Burns, and Maclver that, when the proper 
time arrives, the notice will be served, and for advertising the service forthwith. 

In suggesting this course, I think it right to refer to the letter which my predeces¬ 
sor, the Duke of Argyll, addressed to the Treasury on the 14th November 1857,* when 
the question of renewing the Contract for the North American service was under con¬ 
sideration. 

The Contract then in force would have expired in 1862, and, if it had been al¬ 
lowed so to terminate and the service had been advertised, as proposed by the Duke 
of Argyll, I think it highly probable that instead of the annual loss which has been 
incurred, amounting to about 100,000L a year, tenders would have been received 
from parties willing to carry the mails for at least a large part of the service, viz., 
that between this country and New York, for the amount of sea postage, and that thus 
during the six years a very large saving might have been effected.# 

Indeed, previous to that time, offers had been made by Mr. William Inman, of 
Liverpool, on behalf of the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steam Ship Com¬ 
pany, to convey mails weekly to and from America for the amount of the sea postage, 
and the vessels of that Company have since continued to run weekly with great regu¬ 
larity, and have, as often as permitted, carried the mails on behalf of the United 
States Post Office, the Company receiving as their remuneration the sea postage only. 

I entertain hopes that, should this service be now advertised, the tenders for it will 
show that so large a reduction may be made in its cost, as not only to render the 
service self-supporting, but to make it practicable considerably to reduce the present 
rate of postage to the United States. 

I have, &c. 

STANLEY OE ALDERLEY. 

The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 


This letter will be found at p. 43 of Paper 184. presented to Parliament, in 1859. Session 2. 





172 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


No. 7. 


The Secretary to the Treasury to the Postwaster General. 


Treasury Chambers, 4 April 1866. 

My Lord : I am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s rreasury 
to state that, in accordance with, the recommendation contained in your Lordship’s 
letter of the 8tli February last, my Lords are pleased to authorize you to inform 
Messrs. Cunard, Burns, and Maclver that, when the proper time arrives, notice will 
be served for the termination in January 1868 of the Contract made with them by 
the Admiralty for the conveyance of the North American and Bahamas mails. 

My Lords are also pleased to approve of the service in question being - advertised 
forthwith. 

I am, &c. 

„ HUGH C. E. CHILDERS. 


The Postmaster General, 4c., <jc ., 4c. 

# 


No. 8. 

The Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 

General Post Office, 26 April 1866. 

My Lords: In accordance with the authority given in your Lordships’ letter of 
the 4tli instant, Messrs. Cunard, Burns, and Maclver, and the executors of the late 
Sir Samuel Cunard, have been informed that, at the proper time, notice will be given 
to them that their several contracts for packet services to the United States, Nassau, 
Newfoundland, Bermuda, and St. Thomas, will be brought to an end. It now, there¬ 
fore, remains for me to report, for your Lordships’ consideration, the measures most 
desirable, in the public interest, to adopt for the future regulation of these services. 

As regards the main service, viz., that between this country and the United States, 
l am of opinion that it is not expedient to enter into a new contract, either with 
Messrs. Cunard & Co. or with any other party, like that now existing; and, in place 
of it, I advise that 1 should be empowered in due time to make arrangements with 
the owners of well-appointed ships leaving this country on stated days, weekly, for 
the conveyance of the outward mails to New York, subject to a penalty in any case 
of omission, on the understanding that all letters, &c., for the United States ready 
for despatch on any such day shall be sent by such owner’s ship, and that a payment 
for them shall be made equal to the whole sea postage, if the voyage be performed 
within a certain time, and equal to a smaller sum, according to ;i fixed scale, in cases- 
of overtime. 

Under such an arrangement, I think it probable, looking at the grea t commercial 
intercourse between the two countries, that a daily mail might be established. 

So large a part of the American correspondence is for New York, or for places 
readily served from that city, that, in my opinion, it is desirable no longer to send 
the mails, as at present, alternately to Boston, but always to New York. 

Another alteration which I would suggest, and which it is convenient here to men¬ 
tion, is that the British Post Oftice should undertake the conveyance of all letters, 
&c., sent from this country to the United States, and receive all the sea postage 
thereon, and that the United States Office should undertake to convey all letters, &c., 
from the United States to this country, with a similar claim to the sea postage ; an 
arrangement which, while quite as equitable as the present, would be much more 
convenient. # N 

To accomplish this latter object, it would be necessary to alter the present postal 
convention with the United States. This convention is, however, in other respects 
very defective, and I submit that I should have power to give notice to terminate it, 
and to enter into negotiations for a new convention; acting in both cases, of course, 
through the Foreign Otfice. 

One important object iu tlie new convention would be to effect a reduction of post¬ 
age between the two countries from 1 s. the half-ounce letter to 6 d. The United 
"States Office has already expressed its approval of such a reduction, but the matter 
has been delayed until our present contract with Messrs. Cunard & Co. should be ter¬ 
minated, owing to the very great loss which, while this contract continues, such a 
reduction would entail. Relieved of the burden caused by this Contract, the service 
which, at the present 1 s. rate of postage, produces a loss not far short of 100,000 l. a 
year, will, under the arrangement proposed, and that even at a 6 d. rate, become self- 
supporting. 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


173 


By means of the present service to Boston, mails are sent to Halifax, and from 
Halifax there is a branch to Newfoundland. For this service from England to Hali¬ 
fax, and its branch, it would be necessary to provide ; and I propose soon to issue ad¬ 
vertisements for it. As great swiftness is not necessary, l do not think that the ex¬ 
pense will be great, especially considering that arrangements can probably be made 
with the Canadian Government, under which their weekly subsidized packet, which 
in winter goes to Portland, and in summer to Quebec, may convey the mails to Halifax. 

In accordance with the principle now carried into extensive operation, I presume 
your Lordships will require that the Colonies to he benefited by this service, viz., 
Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland, shall pay 
half the cost. If so, it xv i 11 be important to come to a clear understanding on that 
subject before accepting any tender, so as to avoid getting into a posit ion like that in 
which we were placed as respects the West Indian Service. 

Another service to be provided for is that between New York and Nassau, the pres¬ 
ent cost of which (estimated at 3,000 /.), is paid half by this country and half by the 
Government of Nassau. This service I propose in due time to advertise. 

The remaining service of those under consideration is one between Halifax, Ber¬ 
muda, and St. Thomas, but the object of this service being naval and not postal, I 
submit that this department should he relieved of it, and that it should be transferred 
to the Admiralty; which department, however, we should be quite ready to credit 
with the sea postage of any letters which the packets that would be employed might 


convey. 

I have, & c. 


STANLEY OF ALDERLEY. 


The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, tj-c. , t jv\, $ c . 


No. 9. 

The Secretary to the Treasury to the Postmaster General. 

Treasury Chambers, 13 June 1866. 

My Lord: 1 am desired by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury to 
state tjiat my Lords having given their attentive consideration to your Lordship’s 
letter of the 26th April last, relative to the measures most desirable, in the public in¬ 
terest, to adopt for the future regulation of the North American Packet Service on the 
termination, at the end of next year, of the present Contract with Messrs. Cunard 
& Co., agree with your Lordship in the opinion, that as regards the Main Service, viz., 
that between this country and the United States, it is not expedient to enter, either 
with Messrs. Cunard & Co. or with any other party, into a new Contract like that now 
existing, and in place of it, my Lords* authorise you to make arrangements with the 
owners of well-appointed steamships leaving this country on stated days, for the 
conveyance of the outward mails to New York (subject to a penalty in case of omis¬ 
sion), on the understanding that all letters, &c., for the United States ready for des¬ 
patch on any such day shall be sent by such owners’ship, and that a payment for 
them shall be made equal to the whole sea postage, if the voyage be performed within 
a certain time, and equal to a smaller sum, according to a fixed scale, in cases of over¬ 
time; but it appears to my Lords to be deserving of careful consideration whether the 
arrangements to be made with the owners of such steamships should not be made 
binding on both parties for terms of years. And also, with a view to preventing any 
mfsuuderstanding hereafter on the part of the owners of such ships, whether it should 
not be distinctly stipulated that the whole of the letters accruing on a given number 
of days will be sent by the vessel or vessels the subject of such arrangement. 

For the reasons assigned by your Lordship—viz., that a very large part of the cor¬ 
respondence with the United States is intended for New York, or for places readily 
served from that city, and considering that the fastest steamships ply to New York— 
my Lords concur with your Lordship in thinking it no longer desirable to send mails, 
as at present, alternately to Boston, but always to New York. 

My Lords also agree in your suggestion that the British Post Office should undertake 
the conveyance of all letters, &c., sent from this country to the United States, and 
receive all the sea postage thereon, and that the United States Office should under¬ 
take to convey all letters, &c., from the United States to this country, with a similar 
claim to sea postage ; and with a view to accomplish this object, and to remedy the 
, other defects to which you refer, my Lords authorise your Lordship to terminate the 
present postal convention with the United States, and to enter into negotiations for a 
new convention, acting in both cases through the foreign Office. 

My Lords also approve of your proposal to reduce the postage between the two 



174 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


countries from 1 8. the half-ounce letter to (i d.; and they rejoice to think that when 
relieved of the burden caused by the present Contract with Messrs. Cunard & Co., the 
British postal revenue will allow of this important alteration being made without 
undue loss, and that there is indeed a fair prospect that a service which, even at a 
comparatively high rate of postage, now gives rise to a large deficit, will with a lower 
rate of postage become self-supporting. 

With regard to the Halifax and Newfoundland packet service, my Lords are of opin¬ 
ion that, instead of issuing advertisements, it is desirable to enter into communica¬ 
tion with tlie Governments of the British Provinces in North America, with a view of 
uniting, under an arrangement which shall be fair to those provinces and to this 
country, the two services in question with those now maintained by the Canadian 
Government between Liverpool and Quebec in summer, and between Liverpool and 
Portland in winter; and to this end my Lords will communicate with Her Majesty’s 
Secretary of State for the Colonies, with a view to his bringing the subject under the 
consideration of the several Provincial Governments. 

With respect to the principle on which any arrangement to be made for the packet 
service to the British North American Provinces should be based, my Lords are de¬ 
cidedly of opinion that the necessary arrangements for this purpose should be made 
by the provinces (in communication with each other) themselves, my Lords proposing 
to undertake, on the part of the British Government on their concurring in such ar¬ 
rangements, to defray one-half of any loss which may be occasioned by the postage 
derivable from the correspondence sent by the packets in question not being sufficient 
to defray the cost incurred from their employment. But any such agreement between 
this Government and that of the North American Colonies should be made subject to 
the approval of Parliament, in accordance with the Resolution of the House of Com¬ 
mons of 24th July 1860. 

With respect to the postage to be charged on letters to be sent by these packets, 
it appears to my Lords that it should be the same as that charged on letters sent to 
Canada (by the Canadian packets), and to the other British North American Prov¬ 
inces, viz., 6 d. the half-ounce letter, and that with respect to the postage on Canadian 
correspondence, which may be sent by British packet, via the United States, which 
my Lords perceive is now 8 d. the half-ounce letter, it should be proposed to the United 
States, in settling the terms of the new convention, to fix this rate also at 6 d. 

In accordance with your Lordship’s recommendation, my Lords are pleased to au¬ 
thorise you, in due time, to advertise for tenders for a new Contract for the service 
between New York and Nassau ; one-lialf of the cost (estimated at 3,000 l. a year) to 
be paid by this country and one-half by the Colonial Government. 

As respects the remaining service, viz. that between Halifax, Bermuda, and St. 
Thomas, my Lords authorise you to communicate with the Lords of the Admiralty 
with a view of ascertaining what arrangements are absolutely required for the service 
of that Board, my Lords concurring witli you in the opinion that, in a postal point of 
view, the service is hardly requisite. 

I am, &c. 


HUGH C. E. CHILDERS. 


The Postmaster General, Jc. 4’c. <fc. 


No. 10. 


The Secretary to the Treasury to Sir F. Royers, Bart. 


Treasury Chambers, 13 June 1866. 

Sir : I am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury, to trans¬ 
mit herewith copy of a letter from the Postmaster General, dated the 26th April last, 
together with a copy of their Lordships’ Minute* of the lltli instant, and I am to re¬ 
quest that in laying the same before Mr. Secretary Cardwell, you will move him with 
reference to the proposal therein contained, with regard to combining the future 
packet service to Halifax and Newfoundland with the existing services to Portland and 
Quebec, to communicate with the Governments of the British North American prov¬ 
inces, with a view to the proposal in question being under consideration, and an ar¬ 
rangement satisfactory alike to those provinces and the Home Government carried 
into effect. 

I am, &c. 


Sir F. Rogers, Bart. $c. <j ’-e. $c. 


HUGH C. E. CHILDERS. 


Embodied in the letter to the Postmaster General of the 13th Jnne. 




AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


175 


No. LI. 


The Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 


General Post Office, 15 July 1867. 

My Lords: With reference to the letter from the Treasury to the Post Office, dated 
the 13th June 1866, approving of the arrangements proposed by my predecessor for 
maintaining a postal communication with the United States on the termination of 
the contract with Messrs. Cunard, Burns & Maclver, 1 have the honor to submit for 
the consideration and approval of your Lordships, a form of Tender and conditions 
for the contracts which I propose to enter into with the owners of well-appointed 
steamships leaving this country for New York on stated days. 

From the nature of the service the conditions in t.he case of these contracts will he 
fewer and much simpler than those in other contracts for the conveyance of mails by 


sea. 

I have carefully considered the suggestions made in the letter above referred to, 
whether the Contracts should not be binding on both parties for terms of years, and 
also whether it should not be stipulated in each Contract that the whole of the 
letters accruing on a given number of days will be sent by the vessel the subject of 
such contract. I cannot, however, advise that either of these snggestions should be 
adopted, as 1 think that they would occash n inconvenience and embarrassments to the 
department. It is very desirable that the department should be left as free as possi¬ 
ble, in order that it may be at liberty to make use of any new line of steam vessels 
that may be established to run between this country and New York on regular days; 
and it would, I think, be objectionable to bind the department to send all letters in 
the office on a given day by any vessel, whatever its character, which the Contractors 
might provide to sail on such day, as the department might be aware that a vessel 
appointed to leave a day or two later would in all probability arrive in New York at 
an earlier period. 

I have, &e. 

MONTROSE. 

The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 


[Enclosure in No. 11.] 

Tender for Conveying Her Majesty's Mails from some Port in the United Kingdom to New 

York.* 

Sir: We hereby offer to convey Her Majesty’s Mails, by steam vessels, from t- 

to New York, and on the conditions marked A, every-in-days each 

voyage. 

If required, under the 6th Condition, to provide a room for sorting the mails, we 

shall demand £-for each ship in which such provision shall have to be made; 

and for the food and accommodation of each officer employed, in sorting, we shall de¬ 
mand - l. per voyage if the officer be treated as a chief cabin passenger, and 

- 1. if he be treated as a fore cabin passenger. 

Wo propose as our sureties, in the penalty of £5,000, Mr.-of-and 

Mr.-of-; and we refer you to-as persons of whom in¬ 

quiry can be made as to the responsibility of such sureties. 

We agree to execute a formal contract for the performance of the service, accord¬ 
ing to the terms of this tender and the annexed conditions, and to begin the service 
on the first-in 1868. 

We are, &c. 

{Signature) -• 

{Address) -• 

The Secretary of the Post Office. 


*A11 tenders must be addressed to the Secretary of the Post Office, with the words “Tender for the 
conveyance of mails to New York ” in the left-hand corner of the envelope. Other things equal, a pref¬ 
erence will be given to a tender made upon this printed form and in exact accordance therewith. 
Even, however, when this form is used, the parties tendering may, in a separate letter , to he forwarded 
with the tender, suggest, for consideration, any alteration in the conditions or otherwise. The Post¬ 
master General does not engage, irrespective of other considerations, to accept the lowest tender, nor 
does be engage to accept any tender. . , , , _ ^ 

t In cases where the vessel has to touch at any other port than that from which she^tarts, this blank 
must be tilled up with the name of the last port of call. 




















176 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Conditions, referred to as marked A. 

1. The Contractors to convey, during the continuance of the Contract, on the day 
or days in each week specified in their letter on the other side hereof, such of Her 
Majesty’s mails from the Uni ted Kingdom to New York as may he despatched on some 
one day in each week. 

2. Under the term “ Her Majesty’s mails” are to be comprehended all bags, boxes, 
or packets of letters, newspapers, books, or printed papers, and all other articles 
transmissible by the post, without regard either to the place to which they may be 
addressed or to that in which they may have originated; also all empty bags, empty 
boxes, and other stores and articles, used or to be used in carrying on the Post Office 
service, which shall be sent by or to or from the Post Office. 

3. A penalty of 300 1. to be incurred on each occasion when the Contractors fail in 
providing a vessel, in accordance with their Contract, ready to put to sea at the ap¬ 
pointed time. 

4. The payment by the Contractors of any penalties shall in no way prejudice the 
right of the Postmaster General to treat the failure to provide* a proper vessel at the 
appointed time, or to perform a voyage at or with in the appointed period, as a breach 
•of the Contract. 

5. The hours of departure to be fixed by the Postmaster General, and to be subject 
to alteration by him, from time to time, on a notice to the Contractors of three months. 

6. The Contractors to provide, to the satisfaction of the Postmaster General, a sep¬ 
arate and convenient place of deposit for the mails on board each vessel; also, if re¬ 
quired, a room (with the necessary fittings) for the purpose of sorting the mails, and 
with proper accommodation and mess for the officers who may be employed in that 
duty. The services of the crew to be given in the conveyance of the mails between 
the mail room and the sorting room. 

7. The Contractors and all commanding and ot her officers of the vessels which may 

be employed in the performance of the Contract, and all agents, seamen, and servants 
of the Contractors, shall, at all times during the continuance of the Contract, punc¬ 
tually attend to the orders of the Postmaster General, as to the mode of embarking 
and disembarking mails. , 

8. Should the Postmaster General at any time deem it expedient to place the mails, 
or any part thereof, in the care of the commander of any vessel, such commander shall 
take charge of them, and be responsible for their due receipt and delivery. The com¬ 
mander shall also make the usual Post Office declaration, and furnish such journal, 
returns, and other information, and perform such other services, as the Postmaster 
General may, from time to time, require. 

9. Except such letters as are not required by law to pass through the Post Office, 
the Contractors shall not receive, or permit to be received in the United Kingdom, 
for conveyance on board a ny of the vessels employed under the Contract, any letters 
other than those contained in Her Majesty’s mails. 

10. The Contractors not to convey in any of the vessels employed under this Con¬ 
tract any nitro-glycerine or other article which may have been legally declared 
specially dangerous. 

11. Every vessel which may have started, or which should have started, before the 
termination of the contract, must complete its voyage in like manner as if the Con¬ 
tract remained in force. 

12. The Postmaster General to be authorized to delegate any of his powers to such 
persons as he may deem fit to exercise them. 

13. The Contractors to receive the sum of Is,* for every ounce of letters which 
they may convey; 3d.* for every pound of newspapers, and 5 d* for every pound of 
book packets or packets of trade patterns. But these amounts shall be subject to a 
deduction, in each voyage, of one-eiglith part of their amount for every period of 12 
hours by which the voyage shall exceed the stipulated time; so that if the voyage 
exceed the stipulated time by four complete days, no payment will be made. 

14. Except where otherwise specified, none of the duties enumerated in the fore¬ 
going conditions to give the Contractors any claim to remuneration beyond the pay¬ 
ment mentioned in the 13th Condition. 

15. Every sum of money forfeited by the Contractors to be considered as stipulated 
or ascertained or liquidated damages, and to be payable whether any damage shall 
or shall not have been sustained by reason of the breach for which the penalty may 
be levied. The amount to be deducted by the Postmaster General out of any moneys 
then payable, or which may thereafter become payable to the Contractors; or, at his 
discretion, the payment thereof may be enforced with full costs of suit. 

16. The Contract to continue in force- until the expiration of a written notice at 
any time, and«by either party, of not less than six calendar months. 

* These sums are the estimated equivalent of the different rates of sea postage: payment" bv tho 
weight of letters, &c., in bulk being adopted to save useless trouble. J y 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


177 


1*. All notices which the Postmaster General or any of his officers or agents are 
authorized to give, either to he delivered to the commander of any vessel of the Con¬ 
tractors, or to any officer or agent of the Contractors in charge of any such vessel, 
or to he left at the office or last known place of business or residence of the Con¬ 
tractors, or of one of them. 

I s . I he Contractors not to assign, underlet, or dispose of the Contract, or any part 
thereof, without the consent, in writing, of the Postmaster General. 

lb. In case oi the breach of the 18th Condition, or in case of a great or habitual 
breach of the Contract of any other kind, the Postmaster General to have power, and 
that without previous notice, to terminate the Contract; and such termination not 
to give the Contractors any claim to compensation. 

20. In pursuance of the provisions of the Act 22 Geo. 3, c. 45, no Member of the 
House of Commons to be admitted to any share of the Contract, or to any benefit 
arising therefrom. 

21. I or the due fulfilment of the Contract, the Contractors to enter into a bond, with 
two responsible sureties, to be named in their tenders, in the penalty of 5,000/. Such 
penalty to be considered and recoverable as liquidated damages. 

22. Should any dispute arise respecting the interpretation of any part of the Con¬ 
tract to be framed on the basis of this tender and of these conditions, the same to be 
settled by arbitration in the usual manner; and a submission to arbitration may be 
made a rule of Court. 


No. 12. 

Mr. G. A. Hamilton to the Postmaster General. 

Treasury Chambers, 22 July 1867. 

My Lord Duke : In reply to your letter of the 15th instant, I am commanded by 
the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury to acquaint you that my Lords 
approve of the proposed forms of tender for the conveyance of mails to New York at 
the expiration of the present Contract with Messrs. Cunard & Co. 

I am, &c. 

GEO. A. HAMILTON. 

His Grace the Postmaster-General, J-c., tfc., <fc. 


No. 13. 

The Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 

General Post Office, 24 October 1867. 

My Lords : In transmitting to your Lordships the tenders which I have received 
for the conveyance of the North American Mails, under the conditions approved by 
your letter of the 22nd July last, it is necessary, owing to the fact for which I was not 
prepared, that Messrs. Cunard, Burns, and Maclver, the present contractors, have 
made no offer to enter into a contract under the conditions proposed, that I should 
bring the whole matter before you, and describe the position in which the department 
now stands as regards the American Mails, and the position in which we should stand 
if the tenders in question were accepted. 

There are at present four regular mails per week between this country and the 
United States. 


The outward mails are conveyed : 


Mails by which Correspond- 

On From what port. Name of Company conveying the Mails. ence is forwarded from 



London. 

Tuesday. 

Thursday.... 

Friday. 

Sunday . 

I 

Southampton. .. 
Queenstown_ 

Londonderry 
Queenstown- 

1 North German Lloyd. 

Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia 
Steamship Company. 

Montreal Ocean Steamship Company.. 
Messrs. Cunard, Burns, and Maclver .. 

Day Mail of Tuesday. 

Night Mail of Wednesday. 

Night Mail of Thursday. 
Night Mail of Saturday. 


-12 


007 















178 AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


In addition to these regular outward mails, occasional mails are dispatched about 
once a month: 


Mails by which Coirespond- 

On From what port. Nameof Company conveying the Mails. ence is forwarded from 

London. 

Wednesday Southampton... Hamburgh American Steamship Com- Day Mail of Wednesday. 

pany. 

Thursday... Falmouth. Havre and New York Steamship Com- Night Mail of Wednesday. 

pany. 

Of these six regular and occasional lines of communication, one is provided by the 
British Imperial Government and one by the Canadian Government. The remaining 
four are provided by the United States Government. 


The regular homeward mails are conveyed : 


Day of Sailing ip 0 w ]jBritish Port, 
from America. 


Name of Company conveying the Mails. 


Wednesday. Queenstown . 

Thursday. Southampton 

Saturday. Queenstown . 

Saturday_ Londonderry 


Messrs. Cunard, Burns, and Maclver. 

North German Lloyd. 

Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Com¬ 
pany. 

Montreal Ocean Steamship Company. 


Occasional homeward mails arrive, about once a month, by the vessels of the Havre 
and New York Company, or by the vessels of the Hamburgh American Steamship Com¬ 
pany. 

For the line of communication which Messrs. Cunard, Burns, and Maclver supply, 
the British Government pays a fixed sum annually. For the rest it pays the sea post¬ 
age on the correspondence conveyed, that is, it gives up the sea postage on that cor¬ 
respondence to tlie United States and Canadian Governments, and leaves them to 
make terms with the Packet Companies. 

Of the regular lines three only are useful for correspondence with New York. This 
will be evident, as regards the outward mails, from the fact that the line of Cunard, 
Burns, and Maclver, sailing from Queenstown oil Sunday, to Boston and New York 
alternately, has in the course of 12 months from the 8tli of September 1866, delivered 
mails in New York on 35 occasions, out of 52, either before or on the same day that 
the line of the Montreal Ocean Steamship Company, sailing from Londonderry on 
Friday, could deliver such mails, and that, out of the 17 remaining occasions, the 
Cunard line, which, in all cases, sailed two days after the Canadian line, delivered 
its mails eight times only one day later; four times only two days later, and only five 
times more than two days later than the Canadian line could deliver them. 

Of the 35 mails which the Cunard line, running alternately to New York and to 
Boston, delivered in New York before the Canadian line could deliver them, 20 were 
carried direct to New York and 15 to Boston. It is evident from this fact, that if the 
Cunard line ran to New 7 York only, the Canadian line would be even less useful than 
it now is for the conveyance of letters to New York. 

The Canadian line, though more serviceable for the conveyance of letters to Boston 
than for the conveyance of letters to New York, does not carry the letters to Boston 
in an altogether satisfactory manner. 

This will be evident, from the fact that the Cunard line, though sailing two days 
later than the Canadian line, delivered 27 out of the last 52 mails, in Boston on or be¬ 
fore the day on which the Canadian line delivered its mails; wTiilst in 18 out of the 
remaining 2S mails, the difference between the two periods of delivery did not exceed 
the difference between the two periods of dispatch. 

I have not the means of ascertaining whether the Canadian line now 7 affords a good 
means of communication to the Western and North-western States of America. When 
it was first decided that United States mails should be sent by Canadian packets, 
those packets sailed one day earlier than they now sail, so that the interval between 
their sailing and the sailing of the Cunard packets was greater than it now is. At 
that time it was thought that they would afford an extra mail to Boston, and to the 
Western and North-western States. It is obvious that their usefulness, so far as 
Boston is concerned has been greatly reduced by the alteration in the day of sailing, 
and I am inclined to think that, in practice, they no longer afford a good mail even 
to the Western and North-western States. 

The occasional lines, out and home, do not seem to do much for the publ ic, bu 
merely take some portion of the sea postage away from other United States lines. 
















AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


179 


I hus, on the 17th April, a regular mail and an occasional mail were dispatched from 
Queenstown and Falmouth respectively, and divided between them the sea postage 
which one line would otherwise have earned. 

fhe regular mail reached New York on the 30tli April, and the occasional mail on 
the 1st May, so that the letters by the occasional mail suffered delay by being en¬ 
trusted to it. 

Of the three regular lines between this country and the United States, that which 
is most used tor correspondence between the two countries is the line of Cunard, 
Burns, and Maclver. This will be evident from the fact that 46 per cent, of the 
whole international correspondence from this country to the United States, and 50 
per cent, ot the international correspondence from the United States to this country, 
are carried by the Cunard line. 

Of the outward correspondence, the Canadian packets carry 13 per cent., whilst 
the regular and occasional United States packets divide the remaining 41 per cent, 
between them. The Cunard line thus has the lion’s share of the out ward correspond¬ 
ence, and as the correspondence is regularly dispatched from this country by the first 
mail made up alter it is posted, it follows that the correspondence sent by the Cunard 
line is specially written for that line, which thus obtains the lion’s share of the corre¬ 
spondence by the express preference of the public of this country. 

As the Cunard line has even a larger share of the homeward than it has of the out¬ 
ward correspondence, it would appear that the preference of the American is not less 
marked than that of the British public. 

The partiality of the public, and especially the mercantile public, is no doubt due, 
in a very great measure, to the regularity of the communication which the Cunard 
packets maintain between the two countries. In the present year, of 35 mails dis¬ 
patched from Queenstowu by the Cunard line on Sunday, 26 were delivered in New 
York on or before Thursday in tlfe following week ; whilst of 42 homeward mails 
leaving the United States on Wednesday (with which, of course, this country is most 
immediately concerned, and over which it has the most complete control), 38 arrived 
in time for delivery in London and the principal towns in the United Kingdom on or 
before the morning of Monday in the next week but one after the date of dispatch. 
Of these 38 mails, 17 were delivered in London and the principal towns in the United 
Kingdom on the morning of Saturday in the week after the date of dispatch, and to 
the letters contained in such mails, replies could at once be sent by the night mail of 
.the same date. 

The mercantile community in New York have thus learned to believe that letters by 
the Cunard line will, as a rule, reach them not later than Thursday in each week, and 
the mercantile community in the United Kingdom have learned to expect that letters 
by the same packets w ill, as a rule, reach them not later than Monday in each week. 

No such regularity of communication has hitherto been afforded by the other lines. 

At the close of this year, the contract with Messrs. Cunard, Burns, and Maclver 
will expire, and it has been decided that, from that time, the British Government 
shall provide for the conveyance of the outward mails only, leaving the duty of pro¬ 
viding for the dispatch of the homeward mails to the United States Government, and 
that we shall pay for the conveyance of the outward mails the sea postage on the 
correspondence contained in them. 

Four tenders for the conveyance of these mails, on this basis, have been received. 

They are for the conveyance of weekly mails to New York :— 


On- 


Froru what port. 


Tuesday. South ampton. 

The Day Mail from London of Tuesday 
xcould fall into these boats. 


Thursday. Queenstown. 

r l he Night Mail from London of Wed¬ 
nesday would fall into these boats. 


Friday.j Queenstown - 

The Night Mail from London of Thurs¬ 
day would fall into these boats. 

Friday. Southampton- 

The Day Mail from London of Friday 
would fall into these boats. 

) __ 


Name of Company tendering. 

Number of Days required 
for the Voyage. 

North German Lloyd. 

v 

Days. 

Hi 

Mr. Inman, or the Liverpool, 
New York, and Philadelphia 

From 20 

14 

September to 20 

Steamship Company. 

National Steamship Company 

April. 

Hi 

From 20 Apiil to 20 Septem¬ 
ber. 

14 

The Hamburgh American 
Steamship Company. 


Hi 




















180 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS, 


It will at once be obvious that, of these four tenders, that from the National Steam¬ 
ship Company is inadmissible, since, if that Company and the Hamburgh American 
Steamship Company each kept the time for which they have respectively tendered, 
the letters which were sent to the last-named Company’s boat by the London DaO 
Mail of Friday, would as a rule, reach New York two days before the letters which 
were sent to the first-named Company’s boat by the London Night Mail of Thursday. 

It is highly probable that the acceptance of Mr. Inman’s tender, conjointly with 
that of the Hamburgh American Steamship Company, would, during a portion of the 
year at least, expose correspondence to delay nearly as great. 

For if Mr. Inman and the Hamburgh Company each kept to the time for which they 
have respectively tendered, then, during the six winter months (and it must be re¬ 
membered that tlie arrangement is to begin in mid-winter), the letters which were 
sent to Mr. Inman’s vessels by the London Night Mail of Wednesday would reach New 
York after the letters which were sent to tlie Hamburgh Company’s vessels by the 
London Day Mail of Friday. 

It is true that Mr. Inman affirms that 14 days would be the maximum duration of 
the winter passage of his steamers, and justly claims credit for having made shorter 
winter passages; but inasmuch as he and the Hamburgh Company would, under the 
conditions of the tender, be alike punishable for delay by a deduction of one-eighth 
of the sea postage for every 12 hours of delay (the utmost possible punishment being 
in either case the loss of the whole sea postage), the fact still remains that, so far as 
the Post Office is concerned, the Hamburgh Company would have a motive to com¬ 
plete the voyage in 111 days, whilst Mr. Inman, so far as the Post Office is concerned, 
would have no motive to complete it in less than 14 days. And it may be added, 
that the acceptance of a tender for a voyage of 14 days, and of another tender for a 
voyage of 11^ days, on the prescribed conditions as to penalty, might place the de¬ 
partment in this position—that it might have to reward the first of the parties so 
tendering by paying them the whole of the sea postage for doing the voyage in 14 days, 
and might have to punish the second by deducting 5-8thsof the sea postage for a voy¬ 
age of no greater duration. 

On the whole, it seems probable that, if the tenders of the North German Lloyd, 
Mr. Inman, and the Hamburgh Company were accepted, the public would, during the 
winter months (in which the arrangement is to begin) have only two practically use¬ 
ful mails per week to New York, viz., the mails from Southampton on the Tuesday 
and Friday in each week. Besides suffering from this reduction of the accommoda¬ 
tion which the existing arrangements afford, it is probable that the public would, for 
some time, be inconvenienced by the change in the dates of dispatch to the United 
States. At present a very large portion of the mercantile correspondence is sent away 
on Friday and Saturday in each week. In that which is sent away on Saturday, mer¬ 
chants can review', and probably do review, the commercial transactions of the com¬ 
pleted week, and in it, as I have shown, they can frequently reply to the letters re¬ 
ceived on the Saturday from the United States. 

The following table will best show' the effect of the change upon the periods for 
writing to New 7 York. 


At present they may have American Mail Nights— 


But if the Three Tenders in Question were accept¬ 
ed they could have American Mails Nights— 


On- 


Monday . 

W ednesday. 

Friday or Saturday (or 
both days). 


For despatch from— 


On— 


Southampton 

Queenstown.. 

Queenstown.. 


Monday 
Wednesday 
Thursday 


For despatch from — 

j Southrmpton 
i Queenstown, 
j Southampton. 


Of the effect of the change on their opportunities for reply, no opinion can be formed, 
because we have yet to ascertain how 7 , and by what ships, and in what time, and on 
what days of the week, the homeward mails will be dispatched to this country. 

For the conveyance of those mails the United States Government are to provide, and 
it is to be supposed that they will continue the practice which they have followed for 
some time past, of taking up, not every ship of a Company working from New York, 
but such ot the ships of that Company as seem most likely to make a speedv voyage. 

If they continue this practice, and if we accept the only available tenders which 
vre have received, we shall have no certainty that any ship which carries a mail to the 
United States will also bring a mail from the United States. Out of this uncertainty 
a fresh difficulty will arise. At present, the public derive a very considerable advan¬ 
tage from the sortation of the mails on board the packets of the Cunard line. It is 
estimated that if this sortation at sea were abolished at once in the case of those 
packets, letters to go by them must, in many cases, be posted a dav earlier, whilst let¬ 
ters coming in by them would, in many cases, be delivered a day later than at present. 














AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


181 


lu view of the importance of the sortation at sea, the Companies tendering for the 
conveyance of the outward mails have been requested to state what they would charge 
for titling up sorting rooms, and what for the maintenance of the sorting officers, and 
it would no doubt be possible to arrange for the sortation of the outward mails, on 
any or all of the vessels w hich might be accepted for the conveyance of those mails ; 
but in the face of the uncertainty which prevails, and must for some time prevail, 
with regard to the vessels w r hich are to bring the homeward mails, it would be very 
unwise to send officers from this country to sort the outward mails, inasmuch a* they 
might, and very probably would, have either to wait in America for a vessel fitted up 
for sorting, or return idle in a vessel not fitted up for sorting. 

The United States’ Government has hitherto shown a strong desire to employ the 
vessels of the Havre and New' York Company, from w hom we have no tender, and it 
is conceivable that they might occasionally choose to employ the best vessels of the 
National Company, though we cannot accept the general tender from that company; 
and if at any time they chose to put homeward mails on board the best vessels ot these 
or other companies, instead of on board the w orst vessels of the companies in agree¬ 
ment with this department, they would certainly throw' the arrangements which we 
might have made for sorting on board into very great confusion. 

I may add that if we make arrangements for sorting on board three lines of packets 
instead of one as at present, w e may probably find that the increase of expense would 
be greater than the increase of work would w arrant. For, not only might we seud 
sorters out to come home idle, but we might often find that the minimum force which 
w r e could put on board a packet for sorting purposes might be without sufficient oc¬ 
cupation even during either the outward or the homeward voyage. 

It is needless, however, to press this point, as the obstacles which would stand in 
the way of any attempt at sortation on board, if the proposed changes were effected, 
appear to be too serious to admit of removal. 

The changes which would follow on the acceptance of these tenders would in¬ 
volve,— 

1st. A reduction of accommodation from the 1st January next, so far as the outward 
mails are concerned. 

2ndly. A change in the practice of the mercantile community with regard to those 
mails 

firdly. Absolute uncertainty for the present as to the homeward mails. 

4thly. The loss of the advantages which the department, or the public, derives from 
the sortation at sea, and— 

5thlv. The certainty that, as w y e are to pay to those wdio convey the .outward mails, 
the sea postage on the articles conveyed, no increase in the quantities so conveyed 
will bring any profit to the department. 

Besides undertaking to provide for the conveyance of all the mails to New' York after 
the close of this year, this department has undertaken to provide for the conveyance 
of a fortnightly mail to and from Halifax, Nova Scotia, during the first six months of 
the next year. It is understood that this service, which is required tor State as w'ell 
as for postal purposes, shall, after the first six months ot next year, be provided for 
by the Government of the British North American Confederation, and though it may 
eventually turn out that the maintenance of the service will permanently devolve on 
this department, w r e are not called upon at present for more than a temporary service. 
The department has found that this service is one for which it will be very difficult 
to provide. The Montreal Company, and the companies from which tenders on the 
prescribed basis for the conveyance of mails to New York have been received, have 
refused to touch at Halifax, on their outward and homeward voyages with their reg¬ 
ular packets, and, with one exception, have refused to undertake a Halifax serv.ee 

The Liverpool, New' York, and Philadelphia Company have offered, through Mr. 
Inman, to maintain a fortnightly service between Queenstown and Halifax for six 
months, and to perform the voyage in each direction in 12 days for the sum of 1,000/. 
per round voyage. Mr. Inman has hinted in conversation t hat he might be willing to 
take 750/. per round voyage, and, therefore, for the purpose of argument, it will be 
better to consider that sum as the required payment. If his offer were accepted, and 
if the tenders which have been described w ere accepted, the department, in addition 
to payin<> for the conveyance of the mails to New York the vdiole sea postage of the 
articles conveyed, would have to pay to the Liverpool, New ^ ork, and Philadelphia 
Company at the rate of 19,500/. per annum for the temporary Halifax service, w hich 
service would bv no means be so good as that w'hich has hitherto been maintained b\ 
the firm of Cunard, Burns, and Maclver. The packets ot this last-named firm have, 
on the average, performed the voyage between Queenstown and Halifax within 10 
days, whether in summer or winter, but the Liverpool, New r York, and Philadelphia 
Company propose to take 12 days for the same voyage. 

It is well understood, too, that this latter company have proposed for the service, 
solely as a temporary service, and that the difficulty and danger ot the route, and 


182 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


the absence of any commercial inducement to keep it up, would render them very 
unwilling to carry it on for the stipulated payment, if, by any mischance, the perma¬ 
nent conduct of the service should, after all, devolve on this department. 

The parties who were invited to tender for the conveyance of mails to New York, 
were informed by a note in the form of tender that “ other things being equal, a pref¬ 
erence would be given to a tender made upon the printed form and in exact accord¬ 
ance therewith, but that even when the form was used, the parties tendering might, 
in a separate letter, to be forwarded with the tender, suggest, for consideration, any 
alteration in the condition or otherwise.” 

In sending in the form of tender, Messrs. Cunard, Burns & Maclver, stated in a 
separate letter which they forwarded with the form, and which accompanies this 
letter, that they “ were not prepared to make any offer upon that form, but that they 
were quite ready, if permitted, to lay before the Postmaster General an otter to in¬ 
clude a service to Halifax,” and they were informed in reply, that I should be glad to 
receive such an offer from them. 

The offer which they then made is in fact an offer to carry on the service as they 
have carried it on, for a greatly reduced payment. If their offer be accepted, their 
future service will differ from their present service in these respects: 

1st. They will run once a week between Queenstown and New York (touching 
each alternate week at Halifax, so long as they are required), instead of once a fort¬ 
night between Queenstown and New York, and once a fortnight between Queenstown 
and Boston, via Halifax. 

2ndly. Their ships will no longer be subject to Admirality supervision, but will of 
course be subject to the regulations of the Board of Trade. 

3rdly. They will not be bound to employ, when they touch at Halifax, ships of the 
class of the “China,” “Cuba,” “Java,” and “Scotia,” but will employ on that serv¬ 
ice sometimes those ships and sometimes ships of the class of the “ Hecla,” “Malta,” 
and “Palmyra,” which, though not so large and costly as the ships of the tirst-named 
class, are said to be quite as capable of performing the service with the required 
efficiency. 

4tlily. They will be paid for this service not 173,000 1. per annum, as at present, but 
at the rate of 120,000 /., so long as they are required to touch at Halifax, and 95,0007. 
per annum when they are no longer required to touch at Halifax. For this reduced 
payment, as for the payment which they now receive, they will provide sorting rooms 
and board the sorting officers on the outward and homeward voyages. 

In considering this offer, it will perhaps be convenient to assume that the depart¬ 
ment will be freed from the obligations of the Halifax service at the end of six months, 
and that the payment to Messrs. Cunard, Burns & Mclver, if their offer be accepted, 
would at the end of that time be brought down to 95,000 /. per annum. 

As the companies which have tendered for the conveyance of the American mails 
are to receive the sea postage on those mails, and are also to be paid for the erection 
of sorting offices, and the maintenance of sorting officers on board their vessels, it 
will be necessary, if we wish to compare the offer of Messrs. Cunard with the other 
offers, to reduce it by the sum required for the sortiug offices and officers. Now the 
mails which are conveyed by the Cunard packets require, for their proper sortation 
on board, the services of one clerk and one sorter. The board and conveyance of one 
clerk and one sorter, would cost 2,680 /. per annum, at the rate which the North German 
Lloyd propose to charge, 3,950 /., at the rate which the Liverpool, New York, and 
Philadelphia Company propose to charge, and 4,680 l. at the rate which the Hamburg 
Company propose to charge. In addition to these payments, each Company, except, 
the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Company, would require a 
fixed sum for the first fitting up of the sorting rooms, but this point need not be 
pressed at present, though it is obviously worthy of attention. 

It is enough to say for the present, that before the offer of Messrs. Cunard can be 
compared with the other offers, a mean of 3,500 /., representing the conveyance and 
keep of the sorting officers, must be deducted from the sum which they ask. This 
will bring down the sum of 95,000 l. to 91,500 /. per annum. It may fairly be assumed, 
I think, that if Messrs. Cunard, Burns, & Maclver had tendered to convey the mails 
to New York fromQueenstown on Sunday for the sea postage ( i . e. for 1 s. per ounce 
of letters. 3 cl. per pound of papers, and 5 d. per pound of books and patterns), their 
offer would have been accepted by this department. Nor can there be much doubt 
that, if they had tendered to the United States Government for the conveyance of 
the homeward mails from New York on Wednesday in each week on the same terms, 
that offer also would have been accepted, and that they would have continued to carry 
as large a - hare of the outward and homeward mails as they now carry. 

It may also be assumed, I think, that a certain increase of correspondence will fol¬ 
low the forthcoming reduction of the postage of letters to and from the United States, 
from 1 s. to 6 d. the half-ounce letter. I myself shall be much surprised if the corre¬ 
spondence does not speedily increase to the extent of 50 per cent., but 1 will estimate 
the probable increase in the first instance at 33 per cent. only. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 183 


Supposing all these assumptions to be correct, the Cunard Company would probably 
earn at the sea postage rates, the following sums: — 


ror the conveyance of international letters outwards, viz. 308, 957 

Plus one-tliird for increase of correspondence. 102*985 

_ 41 i 942 

For the conveyance of other letters in open mails, viz. 20?' 257 

For French, Belgian and Prussian closed mails, viz. 169, 300 


788,499 


Which, at 1 s. per oz., would amount to.£.39,424 

For the conveyance of 249,963 lbs. of papers outwards, at 3 d. per lb. 3* 124 

Add for conveyance ot books and patterns under the new convention with 

the United States Post Office at 5 d. per lb., say. 1, 000 


£.43,548 


I have already stated that the Cunard packets carry a larger proportion of 
the homeward than of the outward mails but if they merely continued to 
carry the same proportion in both directions, they would receive at the 

sea postage rates. 

To this would have to be added for 41,500 ozs. of Foreign Office and Ad- 
mirality despatches which now enter into no account at all, but must 

hereafter be paid for at the rate of 1 s. per oz. 

Add for Admirality packages which now go free, but must hereafter be 
sent as freight, say. 


£.87, 096 


2, 075 


1,000 


Making, in all 


£.90,171 


The sum, therefore, which Messrs. Cunard, Burns & Maclver demand would, at the 
outset be only 1,500 /. per annum in excess of that which they would probably earn 
at the sea postage rates; but long before the close of the term for which they propose 
to contract, viz., 10 years, it would probably be much below the produce of the sea 
postage ; and in such case, any excess of the sea postage over the lixed payment to 
them would be profit to this department. 

Again, looking at the unsatisfactory working of the Canadian packets, so far as the 
United States mails are concerned, it would seem that a portion at least of those 
mails might, with advantage, be withdrawn from those packets and restored to the 
Cunard packets, from which they have been subtracted. The sea-postage of the 
mails thus withdrawn from the Canadian packets would be an additional profit to 
this department. 

If, then, the United States Government can be induced to place such homeward 
mails on board the Cunard packets as they ha ve heretofore sent by them, and pay to 
this department the sea postage on those mails, and I can see no reason why they 
should not do so, the acceptance of the offer which Messrs. Cunard, Burns, and Mac¬ 
lver have made, would give us at once a self-supporting service, and probably, at a 
future time, a profitable service by a line of proved efficiency, together with all the 
advantages of the system of sorting on board, and without involving any alteration 
in the practice of the mercantile community on this or the other side of the Atlantic. 

The acceptance of this offer would not preclude the department from also accepting 
the tender of the North German Lloyd for the conveyance of the mails to New York 
on Tuesday from Southampton, and the tender of the Liverpool, New York, and Phil¬ 
adelphia Company for the conveyance of the mails from Queenstown on Thursday, 
but it would no longer be necessary to consider the offer of the latter company for a 
slow service to and from Halifax. The public would then have, as at present, regu¬ 
lar communication with New York three times a w r eek. The question of sorting the 
Tuesdays’ and Thursdays’ mails on board might be left open until w r e could see 
whether the correspondence in those mails would warrant such an arrangement, and 
whether, if the outward mails of those days were sorted on board, we could be certain 
of having employment for the sorting officers on the return voyages. 

Having seen what would follow from the acceptance of the offer from Messrs. 
Cunard, it may be w r ell to consider a little more closely what would follow the refusal 
of that offer. The department will have to fall back upon the three companies from 
which tenders have been received, and of which two sail under foreign flags, and are 
subsidized by foreign Governments. 

The Cunard Company, though no longer under contract with us, would, it is well 
known, continue to dispatch their ships as at present, and would assuredly endeavor, 
























184 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


and very properly endeavor, to place the packets under contract with us in a dis¬ 
advantageous light. It has been thought that we might put ship letter mails on 
hoard the Cunard ships. If we did so, the Cunard Company would no doubt endeavor 
to carry those mails so well as to make the public draw an unfavorable comparison 
between the foreign company which was within, and the British Company which was 
without, the pale of a contract with the British Government. 

It has also been thought that the Montreal Company or the Hamburg Company 
might be induced to change their days of departure, and so take the place, as it were, 
of the Cunard Company; but I am at a loss to know what should induce either of 
those companies to bring their day of sailing nearer to what would still be the day of 
sailing of the Cunard Company, inasmuch as the nearer they approached to that day, 
so much the more forcibly would they fix the attention of the public on the difference 
between their performance and that of the Cunard Company. 

The plain fact is, that everybody, the tendering companies included, expected that 
the Cuuard Company would tender for the conveyance of the out ward Saturday mail. 
Even had they so tendered, the uncertainty which would have prevailed with regard 
to the homeward mails would have involved this department in serious difficulty, but 
so soon as it was known that they would not tender on the prescribed conditions, it 
became obvious, I think, that no arrangement that would be satisfactory to the pub¬ 
lic could be based on those conditions. I presume that they declined to tender on 
those conditions in the belief that, if they stood aloof, any arrangement that might 
be based on those conditions must break down, and that when it had broken down, 
they would be able to make their own terms with the department. They have so far 
departed from this position as to make an offer to continue the service, as it is at 
present conducted, for a greatly reduced payment. They are, in fact, now paid at 
the rate of Us. 4d. per mile, but the sum which they ask would give (when the Hali¬ 
fax service is abandoned) 6s. per mile. 

If the offer of the Cunard Company be rejected, the new arrangement will com¬ 
mence in mid-winter, when the tendering companies will be even at a greater dis¬ 
advantage than in summer. Before Parliament has sat for six weeks, the defects of 
the new arrangement will, unless I greatly err, have become apparent and provoked' 
complaint, and I beg very earnestly to advise the acceptance of the offer of Messrs. 
Cunard, Burns, and Maclver, conjointly with the tenders of the North German Lloyd 
and the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Company. If your Lord¬ 
ship* should decide that Messrs. Cunard’s offer should be accepted, and 1 think you 
will be wise to do so, it is possible that the decision may give rise to a discussion in 
the House of Commons. It may be said that faith was not kept with the parties who 
tendered under the new conditions, seeing that Messrs. Cunard’s offer is made upon 
an ent irely different principle, and that it was sent in two days after the last day lixed 
for receiving tenders; and it may also, perhaps, be said that granting a subsidy for 
the American service is contrary to the recommendation of the Committee on Packet 
Contracts of 1W60. To the first and second of these objections, it may, it seems to me, 
be fairly answered, as I have already observed, that in a note to the form of tender, 
it was expressly stated that although tenders on that form, and in accordance there¬ 
with, would be preferred, any others might be sent in, and that I did not bind myself 
to accept the lowest or any tender. And, as regards subsidies, it may be urged that 
the payment of sea postage instead of a lixed sum is simply a subsidy in another 
shape, and if the amount of the sea postage be greater (as it probably will be in this 
case) than the fixed payment, then the payment of sea postage would be opposed to 
the views of the Committee, who merely record their opinion against large subsidies. 
They were also unfavorable, as a general rule, to contracts terminable at a short 
notice. 

As Postmaster General, I have looked at the question from a postal point of view, 
but 1 can conceive that there are other aspects in which it may be viewed by Her 
Majesty ; s Government, and it may not, therefore, be out of place to call attention to 
the number and quality of the ships which Messrs. Cunard possess, as compared 
with the fleet of the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Company, 
which is the only other fleet sailing under the English Flag. 

I have, &c. 


The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 


MONTROSE. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 

[Enclosure ], in No. 13.1 


185 


Tender for conveying Her Majesty's Mails from some Port in the United Kingdom to 

New York. 


Sir. We hereby otter to convey Her Majesty’s mails, by steam vessels, from South¬ 
ampton to New \ork, and on the Conditions marked A., every Tuesday in 11 12—24 
days each voyage. 

II required, jmdeT the 6tli Condition, to provide a room for sorting the mails, we 
shall demand 75 1. tor each ship in which such provision shall have to be made ; and 
oq ; 16 * OCH ^ an( l accommodation of each officer employed in sorting, we shall demand 
ool. per voyage it the officer be treated as a chief cabin passenger, and 221. if he be 
treated as a fore cabin passenger. 

We propose as our sureties, in the penalty of 5,000 1., Mr. Henry Huth, of Messrs. 
Frederick Huth & Co., and Mr. D. Meinertzhageu, of Messrs. Frederick Huth & Co.; 
and we refer you to the Bank of England, Messrs. Glyn, Mills, Currie & Co., or any 
other London banker, as persons of whom inquiry can be made as to the responsibility 
of such sureties. 

We agree to execute a formal Contract for the performance of the service, accord- 
ing to the terms of this Lender and the annexed Conditions, and to begin the service 
on the 1st January in 1868. 

We are, &c., 

CRtTSEMANN, Director , 

~ H. PETER, President, 

The Managers of the North German Lloyd, Bremen, Germany. 

The Secretary of the Post Office. 


[ I lie form of Tender in full will be found in the Postmaster General’s Letter of 15th 

July-] 


Steamship Bremen. 
ci New York. 

“ Hansa. 

“ America. 

“ Hermann. 


List of Steamers. 

% 

Steamship Deutschland. 

“ Union. 

‘ ‘ Weser. 

“ Rhein (building). 


[Enclosure 2, in No. 13.] 


62 & 63 Tower Buildings, Liverpool, 

30 September, 1867. 

Sir : In forwarding the tender which I have the honour to enclose herewith for the 
conveyance of mails to New York, I write to state— 

1st. That my tender is sent in on the supposition that the mails will be as much as 
possible equally distributed, because at present the collection is not equal, inasmuch 
as the steamers under my management at present only obtain the mails between 
Tuesday and Thursday (two days), while the following steamers obtain the mails 
from Thursday to Sunday (three days). 

2ndly. That I find it impracticable to quote any definite sum for providing a mail 
sorting room until 1 know in what part of the vessel it is to be fitted, what superficial 
or cubical contents are required, what the cost of fitting will be, and whether the 
room will be paid for on both the outward and homeward voyages; but that we quote 
our usual passage fares for officers employed on precisely the same conditions as if 
they were cabin passengers ; two in a state room at 22 l. each, or four in a stateroom 
at 16/. each. I enclose plans of several steamers, should it be desired to point out 
where such rooms would be wanted. 

3rdly. I submit that as Queenstown is inserted as a ‘‘ port of call,” in accordance 
with the requirement of the form of tender, the 3rd and 5th clauses should refer to 
Liverpool, and not to Queenstown; and that the hour for being “ ready for sea” at 
Queenstown should allow for stress of weather on the passage from Liverpool, be¬ 
cause it has happened with the most powerful mail steamers that, although allowing 
28 or 30 hours for the passage down, they have not arrived in time at Queenstown 
owing to storm or fog, and it is essential that the steamers should not leave Liverpool 
before they have time to clear at the Liverpool Custom House on Wednesdays. 

4thly. I beg to remark that the number of days mentioned is given to cover this 
longest passage made, but that the average passages have hitherto been very much 



186 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


shorter, and to show what they have been, I enclose a statement of those made in 
1867, averaging— 

Eleven days, 17 hours, 16 minutes to 20 April; and 10 days, 5 hours, 47 minutes 
since then. 

I have, &c. 

WILLIAM INMAN. 


The Secretary of the Post Office, London. 


Tender for conveying Her Majesty's Mails from some port in the United Kingdom to New 

York. 


Sir, I hereby offer to convey Her Majesty’s mails, by steam vessels, from Queens¬ 
town to New York, and on the conditions marked A., every Thursday, i n|l4 days each 
voyage, from the 20tli September to 20th of April, and in 11 and a halfdays the re¬ 
mainder of the year. 

If required, under the 6th condition, to provide a room for sorting the mails, we 
shall demand nothing for each ship in which such provision shall have to be made ; 
and for the food and accommodation of each officer employed in sorting, we shall de¬ 
mand 22 l. per voyage if the officer be treated as a chief cabin passenger, and 16 l. if 
he be treated as a fore cabin passenger. 

I propose, as my sureties, in the penalty of 5,000/., Mr. Thomas Langton Birley, of 
Carr Hill, Kirkham, Lancashire, and Mr. Charles Inman, of Liverpool, and I refer 
you to the Manchester and Salford Bank for Mr. Birley, and the Bank of Liverpool 
for Mr. C. Inman, as persons of whom inquiry can be made as to the responsibility of 
such sureties. 

I agree to execute a formal Contract for the performance of the service, according 
to the terms of this Tender, and the annexed conditions, and to begin the service on 
the 1st January in 1868. 

I am, &c., 


The Secretary of the Post Office. 


WILLIAM INMAN, Liverpool. 


[The form of Tender in full will be found in the Postmaster General’s Letter of 15th 
July.] 


At London, 1 2th October , 1867. 

Sir: I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of 10th October, 
and to state that, on the information contained in it, I now put in my completed 
Tender. 

I propose that the voyage shall be considered terminated at the New York Post 
Office. 

I have just received a telegram informing me of an inquiry as to what vessels I 
propose to perform the service with, and I have to state they are the vessels the pas¬ 
sages of which I have sent you in my originalTender(exceptingthe Edinburgh), and 
in case of loss, I might have to employ temporarily the Etna, to which a general over¬ 
haul and new boilers (costing 20,000 /.) were given in May this year; but unless some¬ 
thing very unforeseen occurs, the 


City of Paris, 
City of Antwerp, 
City of London, 
City of Boston, 


City of Baltimore, 

City of New York, 

City of Washington (substitute), 


will alone perform our Thursday service. 
I have, &c., 


The Secretary, General Post Office. 


WILLIAM INMAN, of Liverpool. 




AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


187 


Passages , Cork to New York, by United States Mail Steamers. 

Inman Line. _ 


City of Paris 


City of Antwerp 


City of Baltimore 


City of Boston 


City of New York 


City of London 


City of Washington 


Edinburgh 


Left Cork. 

Passage, 

1 January to 
20 April. 

Average. 

1867: 

23 January .. 

20 March. 

24 April _ 

12 4 5 
10 3 20 

j 11 3 42 

29 May. 



3 July . 



7 August.... 



20 February .. 

27 March. 

5 June. 

12 15 40 
11 13 26 

J 12 2 33 

10 July . 



14 August ... 



30 January ... 

6 March. 

10 April. 

13 18 55 

9 6 13 

12 15 15 

| 11 20 8 

15 May. 

19 June. 



24 July. 



28 August .... 



16 January ... 
27 February .. 

3 April. 

8 May. 

9 4 55 

10 15 40 
12 18 5 

| 10 20 53 

12 June. 



17 July 



21 August.... 



9 January ... 
13 February .. 
1 May. 

10 23 55 

11 17 20 

| 11 8 37 

22 May. 

. 

. >.. 


26 June . 

i 


31 July . 

6 February.. 
13 March ..... 
17 April .. 

2 January ... 

16 Voyages... 

Average... 



14 12 27 
11 2 50 

11 20 5 

12 12 10 

| 12 11 47 

19 Voyages. 

Average. 

187 12 21 

11 17 16 


Passage 

20 April to Average. 

28 August. 


10 6 10 

9 23 15 

9 13 

9 5 45 

1 • 

} 9 15 3 

J 

10 15 40 

9 12 41 
10 8 0 

j. 

| 10 4 7 

10 16 29 

9 6 54 

10 6 5 

9 23 7 

[■ 10 1 9 

1 

J 

9 19 30 
10 7 5 

10 9 25 

10 21 45 

| 

j 10 8 26 

10 22 28 

10 8 15 

10 9 20 

12 7 4 

10 22 28 
| 11 0 13 



. 


194 14 1 


10 5 47 



Liverpool, September 1867. 


Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Company, 

Liverpool , 8 October 1867, 

At London. 

Sir: 1 have the honor to state, in answer to your letter, No. 619 S., of 2nd October, 
on the subject of which I have been favoured with an interview this morning, that 
the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Company decline to allow 
their regular Mail steamers sailing every Thursday from, Queenstown to call at Hali¬ 
fax on the outward or homeward voyages. 

In preference to such a service, I hereby offer, on their behalf, to maintain for the 
time named an independent fortnightly service, and subsequently until the expiry of 
three months after notice is given on either side— 

From Queenstown to Halifax, and from Halifax to Queenstown in 12 days, 

for the sum of 1,000/. per round voyage, or 500/. each way, provided the date of de¬ 
parture is about midway between our Thursday’s mail days (not being Sunday): 
Monday from Queenstown would be preferred. 

I have, &c., 

WILLIAM INMAN. 

To the Secretary, General Post Office, St. Martin's-fe-Grand. 











































































188 


AMERICAN SHIRRING INTERESTS. 


[Enclosure 3, in No. 13.] 

National Steamship Company (Limited). 

14, The Albany, Old Hall-street, 

Liverpool , 30 September 1867. 

The Secretary of the Post Office, London: 

Sir: In sending in tlie accompanying Tender, the Board of the National Steam¬ 
ship Company wish to express to the Post office authorities that they are willing to 
incur the necessary expense to expedite their boats, and also to incur any penalties 
for non-performance, on the understanding that so long as the Contracts remain in 
force with the National Steamship Company, the Post Office authorities do not send 
any other mails to New York or Boston on the days which are named in the accom¬ 
panying Tender. 

I am &.c. 

L. W. MACALISTER, 

General Manager. 


Tender for conveying Her Majesty ’ Mails from some Port in the United Kingdom to New York. 


National Steamship Company Line, 

14, The Albany, Liverpool. 

Sir: We hereby offer to convey Her Majesty’s Mails, by steam vessels, from Liver¬ 
pool, via Queenstown, to New York, and on the conditions marked A., every Thursday, 
in 15 days each voyage, from Liverpool or from Queenstown on Friday in 14 days from 
tinal start from Queenstown. 

If required, under the 6tli Condition, to provide a room for sorting the mails, we 
shall demand 500/. for each ship in which such provision shall have to be made; 
and for the food and accommodation of each officer employed in sorting, we shall 
demand 30 1. per voyage if the officer be treated as a chief cabin passenger, and 30 l. 
if he be treated as a fore cabin passenger. 

We propose, as our sureties, in the penalty of 5,000/., Mr. William Rowe, of Liver¬ 
pool, merchant, and Mr. Robert Maxwell, of Liverpool, merchant, and we refer you to 
the National Bank of Liverpool as persons of whom inquiry can be made as to the 
responsibility of such sureties. 

We agree to execute a formal Contract for the performance of the service, according 
to the terms of this Tender and the annexed conditions, and to begin the service on 
the 1st March in 186"\ * 

We are, Ac. 


L. W. MACALISTER, 

General Manager. 


The Secretary of the Post Office. 


[The form of Tender in full will be found in the Postmaster General’s Letter of 15th 
July. ] 


[Enclosure 4, in No. 13.] 

H a m b u rg, *28 Sep tern her 1867. 

Sir : We have the honour to hand you herewith our Tender for the conveyance of Her 
Majesty’s mails from Southampton to New York, by the steamers of our Company, and 
to which we beg to be allowed to add the following suggestions. 

The time of the duration of the voyage we understand to be reckoned from the time 
when the mails are delivered to us at Southampton, up to the time of the landing of 
the same at our pier in Hoboken (New York), and that the local time of both countries 
is to be the basis upon which the duration of the passage is to be calculated. 

In the event of any of our steamers carrying the mails being detained at. the quar¬ 
antine at New York, we would suggest that such time of detention should not be reck¬ 
oned against us. 

If your department should consider it of great importance that we should undertake 
to convey the mails every Friday throughout the year, we beg to say that existing ob¬ 
ligations would not easily allow us to commence at onefc with weekly departures ; how¬ 
ever, in case of need, we are prepared to meet your views in this respect also from 1st 
January next. 

With regard to the Condition 4, on the printed form of Tender, that the payment by 
the contractors of any penalties shall in no way prejudice the right of the Postmaster 
General to treat the failure to provide a proper vessel at the appointed time, or toper- 
form a voyage at or within the appointed period, as a breach of the contract, we do 
not feel justified to undertake the conveyance of the mails under this stringent con¬ 
dition, inasmuch as we are of opinion that the payment of the penalty incurred should 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


189 


exclude the right ot the Postmaster to treat the failure to provide a proper vessel at 
the appointed hour as a breach of contract, for 11 force majeare” might be the cause; 
therefore Condition 4 should be subject, as well as all other conditions, to the mode of 
deciding any difference ot opinion between the contracting parties, as provided by 
rule 22 of the Contract. 

^ ith reference to the condition, sub. 5, we beg to suggest that in case the Postmas- 
tei should make an alteration affecting the hour of departure, the hour should not, 
without our previous consent, be put earlier than Friday at noon. 

Judging that the space required for a sorting room ou board of our steamers (inde¬ 
pendent ot the mail room wherein to deposit the mails), would be equal to about 14 
tons cargo space each way, we think that a sum of 207. per voyage to be paid us would 
be a very moderate remuneration for the lost space. 

M e beg to recommend these suggestions to your favourable consideration. 

We remain, &c. 

The Directors op the Hamburg Amerik-Packetfahrt Actlen Gesellschaft, 

ADOLPH GODEFFROY, Chairman. 

To the Secretary of the Post Office, London. 

P* S.—It on examination of the various Tenders, ours would be acceptable but for our 
having asked \\\ days for the voyage, we are ready to alter it to 11 days only, al¬ 
though the payment is so small as not to admit of any reduction from the sum to be 
received. Our agents, Messrs. Smith, Sundius & Co., 17 Gracechnrch-street, will be 
happy to wait upon you, and arrange any minor matters which may want settling, 
and are authorised by us to agree to perform the service weekly throughout the year 
if you require it. 

ADOLPH GODEFFROY, Chairman. 


Tender for conveying Her Majesty's mails from some Port in the l 1 nited Kingdom to New 

• York. 


Hamburg, 28 September 1867. 

Sir: We hereby offer to convey Her Majesty’s Mails, by steam vessels from South¬ 
ampton, via Cowes, to New York, and on the conditions marked A., every Friday after¬ 
noon in 11£ days each voyage, for the time from 1st March until 15th December, and 
every alternate Friday from 15th December until 1st of March. 

If required, under the 6th Condition, to provide a room for sorting the mails, we 
shall demand 75 1. for each ship in which such provision shall have to be made, and 
20 1. each voyage for the lost space; and for the food and accommodation of each offi¬ 
cer employed in sorting we shall demand 30 1. iu all per voyage out and home, if the 
officer be treated as a chief cabin passenger, and 20/. in all out and home, if he be 
treated as a second cabin passenger. 

We propose as our sureties, in the penalty of 5,000/., Mr. Andrew Duncan, partner 
of the firm of Smith, Sundius & Co., London, and Mr. George Duncan of the same 
firm; and we refer you to Messrs. John Henry Schroder A: Co., London, as persons of 
whom inquiry can be made as to the responsibility of such sureties. 

We agree to execute a formal Contract for the performance of the service, according 
to the terms of this Tender and the annexed conditions, and to begin the service on 
the 1st of January in 1868, if required and timely notice given, otherwise on 1st March 
1868. 

We are, Ar c. 

The Hamburg Amerik-Packetfahrt Actien Gesellschaft, 

ADOLPH GODEFFROY, Chairman, Hamburg. 

The Secretary of the Post Office. 

[The form of Tender in full will be found in the Postmaster General’s Letter of 15th 

July.] 


[Enclosure 5, in No. 13.) 

London, 1 October 1867. 

Sir : In reference to the advertised Contract for the conveyance of Her Majesty’s 
mails from the United Kingdom to New York, although we are not prepared to offer 
upon the enclosed form of Tender, we are quite ready, if permitted, to lay before his 
Grace the Postmaster General an offer for the conveyence of those mails, and to in¬ 
clude a service to Halifax, Nova Scotia. , 

We are, &c. 

CUNARD, BURNS, & MACIVER, 
per JOHN BURNS. 


To the Secretary of the Post Office. 


[The form of Tender in full will be found in the Postmaster General’s Letter of 15th 

July.] 



190 


■ AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


(Enclosure 6, in No. 13.] 


General Post Office, 

1 October 1867. 


Gentlemen : I am to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of this day’s date, and 
to acquaint you, in reply, that the Postmaster General will be glad to receive from 
you an offer for the conveyance of the New York Mails, including a fortnightly serv¬ 
ice between this country and Halifax, Nova Scotia. 

I am, &c. 


F. HILL. 


Messrs. Cunard, Herns & MacIver. 


[Enclosure 7, in No. 13.] 


London, 4 October 1867. 


Sir: In reference to the advertised Contract for the conveyance of Her Majesty’s 
mails from the United Kingdom to New York, we beg to make the following offer, em¬ 
bracing, in addition, the conveyance of mails from New York, conjointly with an offer 
for the conveyance of Her Majesty’s mails to and from Halifax, Nova Scotia. 

We are willing to continue the service in precisely the same manner in which it has 
been and is being conducted by us at the present time, from the 1st of January 1868, 
for a period of 10 years, terminable on one year’s notice on either side thereafter, upon 
the following conditions, viz. : 

1. To perform a fortnightly service from Liverpool to and from New York direct, 

sailing on every alternate Saturday, and calling at Queenstown as at present, with 
vessels enumerated under Class A, but to have in our power the option of substituting 
for the performance of this service any of the vessels enumerated under Class B, or 
vessels of similar efficiency ; and— ' 

2. To perform a fortnightly service from Liverpool to and from New York, calling at 
Halifax, sailing on every alternate Saturday, and calling at Queenstown as at present, 
with vessels enumerated under Class B, or vessels of similar efficiency (or, with vessels 
enumerated under Class A, at our option). 

3. The vessels performing these .services to be subject only to the Board of Trade 
survey, and not to Admiralty requirements and conditions. 

4. These offers to include sorting offices and maintenance of sorting officers out and 
home, as at present, in both classes of vessels, and in other respects the services to be 
scrupulously carried on with the same efficiency and regularity in which they are now 
conducted ; and— 

5. The payment for the performance of these services to be at the rate of 120,000/. 
sterling per annum, but in the event of our calling at Halifax being dispensed with, 
the payment to be at the rate of 95,000/. sterling per annum. 

We are, &c. 


CUNARD, BURNS & MACIVER, 
per JOHN BURNS. 

To the Secretary of the Post Office. 


CLASS (A). 


Vessels. 

Tonnage. 

Scotia . 

3, 871 

Russia. 

2 959 

J a va. 

2, 696 


V essels. Tonnage. 


Cuba.| 2,668 

China.. 2,529 

Australasian. . 2, 761 


CLASS (B). 


Vessels. Tonnage. 


Samaria (building). 2, 500 

Siberia. ! 2^498 

Tripoli.i 2 ’, 061 

Tarifa. 1 2, 058 

Aleppo. 2, 057 

Palmyra.| 2, 044 

Malta. i 2 ,132 


V essels. 

Tonnage. 

Adas. 

1,794 
1,794 
1,785 
1,784 
1, 783 
1,783 
1, 782 

Oly minis. 

Hecla . 

Marathon.. 

Kedar... 

Morocco. 

Sidon. 














































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


191 


NOTES. 

1. The foregoing offers have been based upon the results of the most careful and 
close scrutiny, assuming that they may yield only a moderate remuneration to the 
contractors, taking into account that the services are to be performed in a manner 
creditable to themselves, and meeting the requirements of the public service. 

2. Our guarantee for speed and regularity must be based upon the character of our 
ships, and the recognised efficiency with which we have conducted the mail service 
between Great Britain and America for a period of no less than 28 years, during which 
time we have never failed to sail our vessels at the appointed time, unless detained 
by order of the Government, and during which long period we have never, under 
Providence, lost a passenger or a letter, and we feel convinced that if any other prin¬ 
ciple was adopted, it would be a direct premium for, and lead to, loss of life and 
property. 

3. We have hitherto been reluctant to bring our views under the notice of Gov¬ 
ernment, but we have always considered that there are two important advantages 
which can only accrue from the maintenance of a British contract postal service, the 
first being, the necessity of keeping up a communication with the naval force on the 
North American station, and the propriety that such a service should (when political 
emergency required) be available for the use of the Naval Commauder-in-chief upon 
that station. Now, without a Contract, no steamer could go regularly to Halifax, and 
without a regular steamer the communication could not he maintained; and this argu¬ 
ment, we submit, is equally strong in a colonial point of view. Then again, as regards 
the communication with the United States of America, circumstances have arisen in 
our own experience, and may again arise, when it has been, and may be, of the great¬ 
est consequence for the Foreign Office to be in direct communication, by British con¬ 
tract, packet, with the British Minister at Washington ; but if there is no line of packets 
sailiug under a specific contract, there cauuot. he the regularity which is necessary, 
and it might not be desirable to send Government despatches by French, German, 
American, or other foreign steam packet, or even in British vessels, which, although 
carrying a mail, would not be recognised as peculiarly under contract with the British 
Government, and as such respected, as our fleet, sailing under the orders of the 
British Government, undoubtedly has been, in times when the friendly relations be¬ 
tween this country and America have been in jeopardy. 

4. We may he permitted to draw the attention of his Grace the Postmaster General 
to the fact, that whilst notice has been given to terminate our Contract with the 
British Government, the French and German Governments are doing everything in 
their power to encourage and maintain Transatlantic postal services, and in the case 
of the former, the Government of the Emperor has contracted for a postal service to 
New York for a period of upwards of 20 years, at the rate of nearly double the amount 
which is at present paid by the British Government to us, besides advancing 10,000,000 
of francs, to be returned in 20 years without interest. 

5. In making these remarks, it is not our wish to trespass beyond the postal ques¬ 
tion, with which only his Grace the Postmaster-General has to deal; but had we the 
opportunity we think that we could adduce grave reasons, in a national point of view, 
why the British contract system, as a system, should not be abolished, for surely and 
certainly other nations will hasten to occupy and reap the benefit of the position 
upon the Atlantic, which, if once relinquished by this country, will never be regained. 

G. Our opinions, as those of parties interested, may be liable to be viewed as being 
biased by personal considerations, but having had the honour under Her Majesty’s 
Government of hitherto maintaining, in a very prominent and marked manner, the 
supremacy of the British contract system upon the Atlautie, for upwards of a quarter 
of a century, we may be permitted to submit these observations, confident that they 
will be viewed with trust, as being the results of long experience, and as being borne 
out bv concurrent facts. 

CUNARD, BURNS. & MacIVER, 
per JOHN BURNS. 


No. 14. 

Copy of Treasury Minute dated 26th October 1867. 

The Financial Secretary states to the Board that he has had an interview with the 
Postmaster General on the subject of the tender made by Messrs. Cunard, and that 
the Duke of Montrose, at his request, has undertaken to ascertain whether the Post 
Office authorities of the United States will engage to send by that line the mails whj^h 
they have ready on the days upon which the Cunard vessels sail from New York, pay- 
in«- the sea postage ou such mails to the British Post Office. 

My Lords approve; let the papers wait until the Postmaster General makes known 

the result of his inquiry. 



192 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


No. ir>. 


The Secretary to the Pont Office to the Secretary to the Treasury. 


General Post Office, 13 November, 1807. 

Sir: I am directed by the Postmaster General to inform you that, in accordance 
with your wish, he despatched an officer to Washington by the mail packet of the 26th 
October, with a letter, of which a copy is enclosed, to the Postmaster General of the 
United States. * . 

The officer had written instructions in the event of the reply of the United States 
Post Office to the 3rd paragraph of that letter being in the affirmative, to telegraph 
the word “settled” to this Department, and in the event of the reply being in the 
negative, to telegraph fully the grounds of refusal. 

During his absence the enclosed copy of an advertisement from the Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral of the United States, calling for tenders for the conveyance ofmails to this country, 
has reached this Department through a private channel. It will be observed that 
this advertisement confirms the views expressed in the letter from his Grace the Post¬ 
master General of the 24tli ultimo, inasmuch as it shows that the United States Post 
Office does not contemplate employing all the vessels of the Companies tendering for 
the service, and does not intend to make any arrangements for sorting the mails on 
board. This will not appear surprising when it is considered that the system of sort¬ 
ing on board confers little if any advantage upon the people of the United States. 
The point of arrival and departure in America is the most important city in that country, 
and the Post Office of that city can dispose ofmails with such rapidity as to make the 
sortation of mails on board of little or no value ; but the point of arrival and departure 
in the United Kingdom is a place, postally speaking, of very little importance, and 
incapable of dealing with the large American mails. 

Through the system of sorting on board, a large number of places in the United 
Kingdom despatch their American letters a day later and receive them a day earlier 
than they would if that system were abandoned. 

The advertisement from the American Post Office confirms the fear which the Duke 
of Montrose expressed in the letter of the 24th ultimo, that the system of sorting on 
board would be thrown into great confusion, if indeed it were not quite broken up, 
unless the arrangement proposed by him in that letter were adopted. 

His Grace is happy, therefore, in being able to report that the reply which has now 
been received from our officer in America, and of which I enclose a copy, is satisfactory. 
He does not indeed give the final decision of the United States Post Office, nor could 
we have expected to obtain it before the day fixed for the reception of the tenders in 
America, but he states that in his opinion the question may be considered as “set¬ 
tled,” this last word being the word which he was instructed to use if the reply to 
our letter was in the affirmative. 

He is a cautious and intelligent officer, and well aware of the circumstances which 
made it necessary that he should be especially careful and guarded in his reply, and 
I have no doubt from my knowledge of him, that he has rather understated his con¬ 
viction, and that practically, he has assured himself that on the 23rd instant, the con¬ 
sent, of the United States Post Office will be given. 

He has been instructed to transmit that consent by telegraph on the 23rd, and to 
obtain precedence for his message over all other messages. A letter explanatory of 
his message, may possibly arrive by the 21st instant, and will certainly arrive by the 
23rd instant. 

I am, however, directed by the Postmaster General to state that he has no hesita¬ 
tion in expressing his conviction that the mission to America has succeeded, and in 
recommending the adoption of the arrangements proposed in his letter of the 24th 
ultimo. 

I am, &c. 


The Secretary, Treasury. 


J. TILLEY. 


[Enclosure 1 in No. 15.] 

General Post Office, 

London , 26 October 1867. 

Sir. Referring to Article 2 of the Postal Convention of the 18tli of June last, which 
provides that the British and United States Post Offices shall each make its own 
arrangements for the dispatch of mails to the other, and shall, at its own cost, remu- 
nefcite the owners of the ships by which such mails are conveyed, I am directed by 
the Postmaster General to inform you that, having called for tenders for this service, 
he has received from the North German Lloyd, of Bremen, and from Mr. William In- 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


1 C J3 


man, of Liverpool, satisfactory offers to convey the mails for the sea postage, the 
acceptance of which offers will afford to the public regular despatches from the 
United Kingdom on the Tuesday and Thursday of each week. The mails of Saturday 
have, as you are aware, been conveyed for a number of years, with great efficiency, 
by the vessels of Messrs. Cuuard, Burns, & Maclver, from whom also an offer has been 
received to continue to convey a mail to New York, every Saturday, from Liverpool, 
and every Sunday from Queenstown, by vessels fitted up with sorting rooms, calling 
on each alternate voyage at Halifax, Nova Scotia. 

But this offer is only made on the express condition that the service to be under¬ 
taken shall comprise the conveyance of a homeward as well as of an outward mail, 
and that Messrs. Cuuard shall receive from this department a fixed remuneration for 
the whole service. 

As the public of this country lias long been accustomed to write by this line of 
packets, and the day of sailing has been found so convenient, the Postmaster General 
is considering the expediency of accepting the offer of Messrs. Cuuard, and thereby 
affording, in conjunction with the North German Lloyd and Inman lines, three good 
services to New York in each week ; and, as he cannot doubt that the United States 
Post Office will be equally desirous of forwarding mails to this country by vessels of 
such proved efficiency, I am to request that you will be good enough to acquaint me, 
for His Grace’s information, whether, in the event of Messrs. Cunard’s tender being 
accepted, you will be willing to pay over to this department the amount of remunera¬ 
tion for each homeward voyage which you would otherwise pay to Messrs. Cuuard, 
as the owners of the steam vessels conveying the mails. 

The Postmaster General is aware that the United States Post Office has been anxious 
that the day on which the Cuuard steam vessels leave New York for Queenstown 
should be changed from Wednesday to Tuesday, and lie has ascertained that Messrs. 
Cuuard, Burns, & Maclver would not object to that alteration. 

As it is highly important to come to a decision on this question as early as possible, 
the Postmaster General has despatched this letter to Washington by the hand of Mr. 
Leonard Bidwell, one of the clerks of the Secretary’s office of this department, to whom 
his Grace requests that you will communicate your reply, in order that he may inform 
this department of its purport by means of the electric telegraph. 

I have, &c. 


J. TILLEY. 


The Postmaster General, <fc. <fc. <f c. Washington. 


[Enclosure 2, in No. 15.] 

Proposals for the Conveyance of the United States Mails to the United Kingdom. 

Post Office Department, 
Washington , 23 October. 1867. 

1. In accordance with the provision of the New Postal Convention between the 
United States and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, coming into 
operation on the 1st of January 1868, that “ Each office shall make its own arrange¬ 
ments for the dispatch of mails to the other office by well-appointed ships sailing on 
stated days, and shall at its own cost remunerate the owners of such ships for the con¬ 
veyance of the mails: ” 

2. Notice is hereby given that proposals will be received at the Post Office Depart¬ 
ment, in the City of Washington, until 3 p. m. of Saturday, the 23d of November 1867, 
for the conveyance of the mails of the United States for a period of one year, commenc¬ 
ing on the 1st of January 1868, by well-appointed ships departing on stated days, and 
at'regular intervals of time, from a designated port in the United States to a port or 
ports in the United Kingdom. 

3. Each proposal must name the port of departure from the United States; the port 

or ports of destination in the United Kingdom ; the names, tonnage, and class of each 
steamship tendered for the mail service; the time to be occupied in performing each 
voyao-e from the port of embarkation to the port or ports of debarkation ; the days and 
dates^of proposed departures from the United States ; and the compensation asked for 
the sea transportation of the mails at designated amounts per ounce for letters, and 
per pound for newspapers, book packets and patterns, or samples of merchandise, re¬ 
spectively. .. 

4. Bidders tendering steamships which have been employed m the trans-Atlantic mai I 
service during the present year, should transmit with their proposals, authentic state¬ 
ments of the Victual time occupied by such steamships in performing each outward 
passage from the United States to the United Kingdom during the year 1867. 

5. The proposed schedule days and hours of sailing from the United States must be 

067 - 13 




194 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


subject to approval by the Postmaster General, who reserves the right to adjust aud 
fix the schedules of departure of all the steamships which he may accept, in such man¬ 
ner as will secure the greatest attainable regularity and efficiency in the mail service. 

6. As the Postmaster General is restricted by law from allowing any greater com¬ 
pensation for the transportation of the mails to foreign ports than the sea and United 
States inland postage to an American, and the sea postage only to a foreign vessel, 
proposals naming a higher rate of compensation cannot be considered by the Depart¬ 
ment. 

7. Each proposal must be properly guaranteed with satisfactory testimonials as to 
the ability of the party making it to perform the mail service according to its terms. 

8. If deemed advisable by the Postmaster General the owners of the accepted steam¬ 
ships to execute formal contracts with good and sufficient sureties for the designated 
service, containing all the usual provisions and stipulations of ocean mail steamship 
contracts, including the imposition of fines, or deductions for delays or irregularities, 
and of suitable penalties for failures to perform any of the regular voyages embraced 
in the proposals. 

9. Proposals should be addressed under seal to the Postmaster General, with the 
words, “Mail Proposals,” “ Foreign Mails,” written on the face of the address. 


Postmaster General. 


[Enclosure 3, in No. 15. j 

Copy of a Telegram received by Atlantic Cable at the General Post Office , at 7.45 p.m. on l! 2th 
November 1867, from Mr. Leonard Bidwell, an officer of the Post Office sent to Washing¬ 
ton on the 26th October. 

Bidwell, to Post Office Secretary, London. 

“Matter cannot be finally closed till 23rd, when their Tenders come in ; but may, I 
think, be considered as settled.” 


No. 16. 


Mr. Inman to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 


Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steam Ship Company, 

Nos. 62 and 63, Tower Buildings, 

Liverpool , 14 November 1867. 

My Lords, I have the honor to address your Lordships on the following subject:— 

On the 1st October, in accordance with advertisement, I sent in a tender to the 
General Post Office for the conveyance of mails to America, and I have reason to be¬ 
lieve that the Cunard Company did not intend to tender. 

Not having received any answer to my tender, and yet finding that mail sorting- 
rooms are being fitted up in Cunard’s cargo steamers, I am led to infer that some 
change may be in contemplation, or that they have some encouragement not granted 
to me. 

As their contracts have hitherto been carried out by your Lordships, I have re¬ 
spectfully to express a hope that, in accordance with the letter I received in 1858 
(copy enclosed), no change may be sanctioned without my having at least an oppor¬ 
tunity of being heard. 

I have, &c. 


_ _ WILLIAM INMAN. 

lo the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury, London. 


[Enclosure in No. 16.] 

Sir Charles Trevelyan , K. C. Ii., to Mr. Inman. 


Treasury Chambers, 9 November 1858. 

Sir, I am desired by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury to inform 
you, in reply to the letter addressed by you to this Board, on behalf of the Liverpool, 






AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


195 


New 4ork ami Philadelphia Steam Ship Company, that when a new postal service is 
about to be established by Government, it is the practice of their Lordships to invite 
tenders by public advertisements, thereby affording to all parties the opportunity of 
competing for such services, provided they conform to the required conditions. 

I am, &c. 

C. E. TREVELYAN. 

William Inman, Esq.. Liverpool. 


No. 17. 


The Secretary to the Treasury to the Postmaster General. 


Treasury Chambers, 15 Xovember 1867. 

My Lord Duke, I am commanded by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s 
Treasury to inform you that they have had under their consideration your Grace’s let¬ 
ter of the 24th ultimo, reporting upon the tenders sent into your department for the 
conveyance of the North American mails; and I am to authorise you to accept those 
of the North German Lloyd Company, and of the Liverpool, New York, and Phila¬ 
delphia Steam Ship Company, for the conveyance of the mails in question, on Tues¬ 
days and Thursdays in each week respectively. 

With regard to the tenders of the National Steam Ship Company, and of the Ham¬ 
burgh American Steam Company to convey the mails on Fridays, and to the offer 
made by Messrs. Cunard, Burns A M'lver, i am to state that my Lords will direct a 
communication to be sent to you when they have arrived at a decision in the matter. 


I am, Ac. 


GEORGE WARD HUNT. 


His Grace the Postmaster General. 


No. 18. 


The Secretary to the Treasury to Mr. Inman. 


Treasury Chambers, 15 Nor ember 1867. 

Sir. I am commanded by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury to 
acknowledge the receipt of your letter of 14th instant on the subject of the tenders 
which have been made for the conveyance of the North American Mails, and I am to 
inform you that my Lords have authorised the acceptance of that which has been 
sent in by you for the conveyance of them weekly from Queenstown on Thursday. 

I am to add. that an offer from Messrs. Cunard for a contract under which mails 
would leave London on Saturdays is, with other offers, still under consideration. 

I am. Ac. 

GEORGE WARD HUNT. 


W. Inman. Esq. 

Lirerpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Company , 

62. Toner Buildings, Liverpool. 


No. 19. 

The Secretary to the Post Office to the Secretary to the Treasury. 

General Post Office, 16 November 1867. 

Sir With reference to your letter of the 15th instant, authorising the Postmaster 
General to accept the tender of Mr. William Inman for the conveyance of a mail 
everv Thursday from Queenstown to New York, and the tender of the North German 
Liovd tor the conveyance of a mail every Tuesday from Southampton to New York, 
I am directed by the Postmaster General to submit, for the approval of the Lords 
Commissioners of the Treasury, draft contracts* for each of these services. 

1 am ’ &C * J. TILLEY. 

G. Ward Hunt, Esq.. M. P., Treasury. _ 


These contracts will be laid upon the Table of the House in a separate form. 








196 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


No. 20. 


The Secretary to the Treasury to the Postmaster General. 


Treasury Chambers, IS November 1867. 

My Lord Duke, With further reference to your Grace’s letter, dated the 24tli ulti¬ 
mo, I am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury to state, 
that having already authorised your Grace to accept the tenders of the North Ger¬ 
man Lloyd, and of the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Company, for the con¬ 
veyance of mails from this country to New York, on Tuesday and Thursday respect¬ 
ively, my Lords will now proceed to consider the points upon which no decision has 
yet been given by them, namely: — 

1st. How the proposed temporary service to Halifax can best be provided; and, 

2ndly. As to the conveyance of the American mails at the latter part of the week. 

With regard to the first point, it appears that there are two offers before your Grace; 
one from Mr. Inman on behalf of the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Com¬ 
pany, to maintain a fortnightly service between Queenstown and Halifax for six 
months, and to perform the voyage in each direction in 12 days, for a sum of 1,000/. 
per round voyage, or 26,000/. per annum, which sum Mr. Inman has hinted in conver¬ 
sation might be reduced to 750/. per round voyage, or at the rate of 19,500/. per an¬ 
num. The other from Messrs. Cunard & Co., to combine with a contract service be¬ 
tween Queenstown and New York a fortnightly call at Halifax, at an additional cost 
of 25,000/. per annum. 

It appears to ray Lords that should the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia 
Company be willing to undertake a contract for six months at the sum named in con¬ 
versation by Mr. Inman, it would be advantageous for the public service to agree 
with that Company upon those terms; the sum to be paid being at the rate of 5,500/. 
per annum less than that named by Messrs. Cunard, and the order not being dependent 
upon the acceptance by your Grace of any other contract, as is the case with the pro¬ 
posal of the laiter Company. While in the event of my Lords determining to accept 
Messers. Cunard’s offer to convey mails weekly between Queenstown and New York, 
the alternate weekly service under such arrangement would be relieved from the 
delay consequent upon an obligation to call at Halifax. 

The service being only a temporary one, my Lords do not think the anticipated 
difference of time for the performance of the voyage as between the two offers is a 
material consideration, and they are therefore pleased to authorise your Grace to 
offer to Mr. Inman a contract for six months for a fortnightly service between Queens¬ 
town and Halifax, for the sum of 750/. per round voyage, the service to be performed 
in each direction in 12 days. 

With respect to the second point, my Lords observe that, in recommending them to 
accept the offer of Messrs. Cunard conjointly with the tenders of the North German 
Lloyd, and the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Company, your Grace has not 
stated your reasons for not advising that the offer of the Hamburgh American Steam 
Ship Company should also be accepted; and as their ships sail on Friday, a day not 
named by any other of the tendering Companies (except the National Steam Ship 
Company, whose offer my Lords agree with your Grace is, for the reason given by 
you, inadmissible), it would appear at first sight that the acceptance of the offer of 
that Company would give additional accommodation to the public. My Lords, how¬ 
ever, presume that, your Grace has some good reason for abstaining from recommend¬ 
ing the acceptance of such offer, and they request that they may be favoured with your 
Grave’s views upon the matter. 

I have, &c. 


His Grace the Postmaster General. 


GEORGE WARD HUNT. 


No. 21. 

The Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 

General Post Office, 19 November 1867. 

My Lords, In compliance with the request made in your Lordships’ letter of the 
18tli instant, that I would state my reasons for not advising that the tender of the 
Hambuigh American Steam Ship Company, for the conveyance of a mail from South¬ 
ampton to New York every Friday, should be accepted, I have the honour to observe 
that this tender was not recommended for acceptance because it was not thought that 
a mail on Friday from Southampton, intervening between a mail on Thursday from 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


197 


Queenstown and a mail on Sunday from Queenstown, would be of service to the public. 
In the first place, comparatively few letters could be sent in such a mail, as the packet 
of Thursday would clear out all the letters from all parts of the kingdom up to Wednes¬ 
day night, and would leave but one day’s accumulation from only a portion of the 
kingdom for the packet of Friday. 

In the second place, it is probable that letters posted on Thursday, to be sent by 
the vessels of the Hamburgh Company on Friday from Southampton would be de¬ 
livered in New York, as a rule, on the Tuesday or Wednesday of the next week but 
one to that of their departure; and, in such case, they would frequently be overtaken 
bj letters posted on Saturday (two days later), for the packets of Sunday from Queens¬ 
town. The knowledge that they could be so overtaken, and that even when not 
overtaken, they would often arrive only one day earlier than letters posted two days 
later, would probably prevent the mercantile public from using the Friday packet at 
all. Under these circumstances, the Hamburgh Company would have but little in¬ 
ducement, to perform the voyage well; for their earnings from sea postage would be 
very small, and the penalties tor delay, being based on the sea postage, would be pro¬ 
portionately trifling. All things considered, therefore, it seemed tome that if it, were 
decided to accept, the tender of Mr. Inman and the offer of Messrs. Cunard, Burns 
Maclver, the public would derive no such benefit from the services of the Hamburgh 
Company as would warrant the withdrawal of even the small sum which they would 
earn from the earnings of the Cunard packets. 

I have, &c. 

MONTROSE. 

The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, tfe. cfe. <fc. 


No. 22. 

The Secretary to the Treasury to the Postmaster General. 

Treasury Chambers, 20 November 1867. 

My Lord Duke, 1 am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treas¬ 
ury to acquaint your Grace that my Lords have had under their consideration Mr. 
Tilley’s letter of the 16th instant, transmitting a draft contract with Mr. William 
Inman, for the conveyance of a mail every Thursday from Queenstown to New York, 
and also a draft contract with the North German Lloyd, for the conveyance of a mail 
every Tuesday from Southampton to New York. 

I am desired to state that my Lords approve of both the draft contracts in question. 

1 ai "’ &C * GEORGE WARD HUNT. 

His Grace the Postmaster General. 


No. 23. 

The Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 

General Post Office, 20 November 1867. 

MY Lords, In accordance with the directions contained in your Lordships’ letter 
of the 18th instant, the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steam Ship Company 
were written to, and offered a Contract for the conveyance of Her Majesty s mails tor six 
months, between Queenstown and Halifax, Nova Scotia, at the rate of 7oO 1. the round 
voyage; the service to be performed in each direction in 12 days; and I have the 
honour to report that I have this day received the reply of the Company, agreeing 
to undertake the performance of the service, on the proposed teims. 

I have, &c., 

The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, fc. <fc. <fc. 


MONTROSE. 




198 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


No. 24. 


Mr. 1 liman to the Secretary of the 'treasury. 


London, 22 November 1867. 

Sir: Referring to my interview this morning, it would he a great injustice, and I 
am satisfied offensive in America, if Canards get 95,000/. a year for the New York 
mails, while we only receive about 90,090/. I tendered to advertisement in fall faith 
that the Post Office had fixed the pay, and I think even now others will do it, if Ca¬ 
nards will not. Our steamers are as good as Canards’, who followed our example in 
screws, and in calling at Cork free, after asking 500/. a trip, and we have performed, 
and always been ready to perform, as much service in war time as Canards. 

Any advantage given them over us can only injure the public service, because how 
can we, as mail carriers, have a fair trial unless both are treated alike? The age of 
my company (17 years), with as good a fleet of mail steamers as Canards’ (yet with 
no grant against their 176,000 /. a year), proves that on equal terms we should long 
since have been before them, or the service better than it is. I did not seek the Hali¬ 
fax mails, but, when asked to call, proposed an independent service, believing we 
were accommodating the public service to enable the Post-Office to do without Ca¬ 
nards; and I repeat now my request of this morning, tha if Canards are to receive 
95,000 /. a year for what I believe will not bring us 35.000 /., we may be absolved 
from our offer of the Halifax service. Ocean postage first brought us in 800 /., in¬ 
creasing to 1,200 /. a voyage, but with two departures turned into three, and postage 
reduced one-half, does not show 500 /. a week, and with this against 2,000 /., or there¬ 
abouts, steamers being alike, how can we continue to run on such unequal terms? 

If, then, Cunards, not tendering according to advertisement, receive their own 
terms, may I hope that I may give six months’ notice and obtain equally high terms. 
I respectfully press for equality with hitherto most highly favoured competitors, or in 
other words that they may be reduced, and my Company advanced to what has been 
hitherto ocean mail postage; as I understand it L a matter for the Cabinet, may I 
hope this may be submitted before a final decision. 

I am, &c., 


WILLIAM INMAN. 


G. W. Hunt, Esq.. 

Secretary to the Treasury. 


No. 25. 

The St or el ary to the Treasury to the Postmaster General. 


Treasury Chambers, 23 November 1867. 


My Lord Duke : 1 am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treas¬ 
ury to forward to yon, for your information, a copy of a letter which has been addressed 
to me by Mr. Inman, on the subject of the conveyance of the American mails. 

I am, &c. 


His Grace the Postmaster General. 


GEORGE WARD HUNT. 


(Copy of letter of 22d Nov. enclosed.) 


No. 26. 

The Secretary to the Treasury to Mr. Inman. 

Treasury Chambers, 23 November 1867. 

Sir: I have received and laid before the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s 
Treasury your letter of yesterday’s date, on the subject of the conveyance of the Ameri¬ 
can mails, and I am to inform you that it will be brought before Her Majesty’s Gov¬ 
ernment when they next take the question to which it relates into their consideration. 
1 am, &c. 

GEORGE WARD HUNT. 

W. Inman, Esq., 

Cox%s Hotel , Jer my n-street, S. IT. 




AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


199 


No. 27. 

The SecrSary lo the Treasury to Mr. Inman. 

Treasury Chambers,25 November 1867. 

Sir: W ith reference to your letter of the 22ncl instant, on the conveyance of mails 
between this country and Halifax, I am desired by the Lords Commissioners of Her 
Majesty’s Treasury to request that you will inform my Lords upon what grounds you 
ask that your company may be relieved of their engagement to undertake the Halifax 
service, in the event of a contract being entered into by Her Majesty’s Government 
with Messrs. Cunard for an entirely different service, viz., one between this country 
and New York. 

I am, &c., 

GEORGE WARD HUNT. 

W. Inman, Esq., 

('ox's Hotel , Jermyn street, S. W. 


No. 28. 

Mr. Inman to the Secretary to the Treasury. 

Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia 

Steam Ship Company. 

Liverpool, 26 November 1867. 

Sir : I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letters of the 23rd instant 
(18,234), and of the 25th instant (18,234f*). In reply to the latter, I have to state, for 
the information of the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury, that prior to 
the offer made by me on the 5th of October, to convey the mails to Halifax, I had per¬ 
sonally explained to Mr. Tilley and to Mr. Hill, at the General Post-Office, that I had rea¬ 
son to believe the Cunard Company would not tender for the service; that we could 
only take it from Cork to Halifax, either en route from Antwerp, or from Liverpool to 
New York; that the port charges and extra insurance alone would amount to 500 /., 
without any other expenses of the detour and detention. But I stated that we were 
so anxious to establish an equality in the general Atlantic trade with the Cunard 
Company, and to that end to assist in carrying out any service they refused, that we 
would, to accommodate the Post-Office, and, as a temporary arrangement, undertake 
to perform if. 

I made this offer in the full belief that Cunard would not be allowed more favour¬ 
able terms than others. 

If, however, the Cunard Company are to receive 95,000 /. a year or 1,820 l. a voyage, 
for sailing the same day to New York direct, the result will simply be, that each alter¬ 
nate Saturday will witness the Cunard mail steamer sailing from Liverpool direct to 
New York, side by side with ours for the same port, via Halifax, and receiving only 
750 l. against Cunard’s 1,820 7. 

Cunard, therefore, being thus enabled to underquote our rate of freight, the natural 
consequence would inevitably be, that our steamer would go empty. 

Such a grant, therefore, to the Cunard Company would upset the whole basis upon 
which our offer was founded. 

I have, &c. 

WILLIAM INMAN. 

The Secretary to the Treasury, London. 


No. 29. 

The Secretary to the Tost Office to the Secretary to the Treasury. 

General Post Office, 27 November 1867. 

Sir: I am directed by the Postmaster General to acknowledge the receipt of your 
letter of the 23rd instant, transmitting, for the information of his Grace, a copy of a 
letter from Mr. William Inman, of Liverpool, on the subject of his tender for the North 
American Mail Service. 

In this letter Mr. Inman estimates the payment which he will receive for the car- 




200 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


riage of mails by liis vessels, calculated at the reduced rate of sea postage, which is 
to come iuto operation in January next, at JO,000 l. a^ ear, and as he has been in the 
habit of conveying United States Mails for the sea postage, he is in a position to form 
a correct estimate. But the circumstance is uot in his favour, as it shows that, either 
from the days of sailing or from some other cause, the merchants and others of this 
country and America have not found it convenient to write by the packets of the In¬ 
man line. On the contrary, it is a conclusive evidence of the necessity of maintaining 
the Cunard line, by which heavy mails have always been sent by the express prefer¬ 
ence of the public. 

Mr. Inman desires to be paid for the service he has undertaken to perform upon 
terms similar to those which it has been proposed to pay to Messrs. Cunard. Burns, & 
Maelver, and the Postmaster General would see no objection to such a course, those 
terms being based upon the principle that the packets shall be self-supporting ; that 
is to say, that the payment shall be so regulated as, in all probability, not to exceed 
the amount of the sea postage chargeable on the correspondence carried. 

When Mr. Inman has performed liis new Contract for six or twelve months, the 
Postmaster General will be able to consider what that payment should be. 

In regard to the mail service between this country and Halifax, Nova Scotia, for 
which Mr. Inman has also made an offer, and which offer has been accepted, if the 
Lords Commissioners of the Treasury should see tit to release him from his under¬ 
taking, the Postmaster General can state that Messrs. Cunard are ready to enter into 
a contract, terminable at six months’notice on either side, for a separate service fort¬ 
nightly, for the sum of 25,000 l. a year, and with the same efficiency as at present. 

I am, Ac. 


G. Ward Hunt, Esq., M. P., ^c. <fr. <fc. Treasury. 


(Signed) 


J. TILLEY 


^7 


No. 30. 


The Secretary to the Treasury to the Postmaster General. 


Treasury Chambers, 30 November 1867. 

My Lord Duke : I am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treas¬ 
ury to forward to you a copy of a letter addressed, under date of the 26th instant, to 
this Board by Mr. Inman on the subject of the Halifax Mail Service, and I am to inform 
you that their Lordships are ready to release that gentleman from his contract for a 
temporary mail service to Halifax. 

I am to ask that your Grace will ascertain from Mr. Inman, as soon as possible, his 
wishes in the matter, in order that, if it be necessary, other arrangements may be 
made. 


I am, Ac. 

His Grace the Postmaster General, 


(Signed) 
4‘C. 4'c. cpc. 


GEORGE WARD HUNT. 


No. 31. 


1 he Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 


General Post Office, 4 December 1867. 

My Lords: With reference to your letter of the 30th ultimo, I have the honour to 
inform you that I have communicated with Mr. Inman on the subject of his offer to 
perform a temporary mail service between Queenstown and Halifax, and that he has 
decided upon undertaking that service on the terms proposed. 

I have accordingly caused a draft Contract to be prepared, and I submit this draft 
for the approval of your Lordships. 

I have, &c. 


(Signed) 

The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, tfc . fie . 


* MONTROSE. 




AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


201 


No. 32. 

The Secretary to the Treasury to the Postmaster General. 


Treasury Chambers, 5 December 1867. 

My Lord Duke : 1 am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treas¬ 
ury to signify to you their approval of the draft Contract, which you have submitted 
to them, with Mr. Inman for the conveyance of mails to Halifax, and I am to authorise 
your-Grace to execute it without further delay. 

I am, Arc. 


(Signed) GEORGE WARD HUNT. 

His Grace the Postmaster General. 


No.33. 

The Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 

General Post Office, 26 November 1867. 

My Lords: 1 have now received the following telegram from the officer whom I 
despatched to the United States : 

“They accept offers of Hamburg line for Tuesday, Bremen line for Thursday, and 
Inman for Saturday, at 15 cents an ounce for letters, six cents a pound for all 
other matter; payment to be made in currency. They will give Cunard Wednesday 
on same terms, but under arrangement with him, not with us, leaving us to deduct 
from our fixed payment to Cunard the sum paid to him by them.—Reply.” 

In my letter of the 24tli of October, I stated that if the United States Post Office 
would continue to put mails on board the Cunard packets, although those packets 
were under^l on tract with us ami not with the United States, and would pay to us the 
sea postage on those mails, we should have an estimated revenue from the mails of 
90,000 l. per annum to set against the payment to the Cunard Company of 95,000 l. per 
annum, for a service between this country and New York. I also showed that of this 
sum of 95,000 /., a sum of 3,500 l. must be taken to represent the cost of sorting on board, 
so that the cost to be contrasted with the revenue was 91,500 l. 

The reply which I have received to the inquiry which I have addressed to the United 
States Post Office is in part satisfactory. They will put mails on board the Cunard 
packets leaving New York on the Wednesday in each week, their present day of sailing, 
and though they will make payment for the service to the Cunard Company and not 
to us, yet as we should always know the amount of such payment, and could deduct 
it from our fixed payment to the Cunard Company, no inconvenience would result 
from the arrangement. 

The reply tends also to confirm me in llie belief that no service which would be 
satisfactory to the public of this country could be established if the arrangements 
which it was at first proposed to adopt were carried out in their integrity. The reply 
shows that the United States Post Office intend to dispatch a mail to this country on 
Tuesdays from New York. This mail will be in most cases useless, and in some abso¬ 
lutely hurtful. The letters contained in it will, as a general rule, reach Southampton 
on Sundays, and will fall into the first delivery in London on Mondays, and into an 
afternoon delivery on the same day in the great provincial towns of Euglaud. In 
Scotland and in Ireland, they will be delivered proportionately later. Thus they will, 
in most cases, be overtaken by, and in very many cases be outstripped by, the letters 
dispatched one day later from New York to Queenstown bv the Cunard packet. I 
mention this circumstauce in confirmation of the view which I have already expressed, 
and to show that the project for the establishment of a daily mail between this coun¬ 
try and New York, however tempting it may appear on paper, must often result in 
disappointment to the public. 

So far, the reply of the United States Post Office is satisfactory; but I regret to 
find that they propose to pay for the conveyance of the homeward mail less than the 
sea postage, and that we shall not receive from them ou account of the Cunard mails 
so much by 15,000 l. per annum as I had expected to obtain. 

Under these circumstances, we shall have to contrast with the sum of 91,500 /., the 
proposed cost of the Cunard packets, an estimated revenue of 75,000 l. only, instead 
of 90,000 7. I am, of course, not prepared to recommend that we should pay to the 
Cunard Company a sum so greatly exceeding that which we can at first derive trom 
the correspondence; but I am still strongly of opinion that the services of that Com- 



202 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


pany are highly advantageous to the public, even if they be regarded only from the 
point of view of the Post Office; and I must think that an effort should be made to 
retain those services, and to ascertain whether the Cunard Company, on fair consid¬ 
eration of all the circumstances of the case, will not modify their terms so as to meet 
the requirements of the department. 

It will be remembered, that in my letter of the ‘24tli of October, I took a fixed sum 
of 90,000 l. as the probable revenue derivable from the Cunard packets iu the first 
year of the new arrangement, and stated that any increase on that amount in conse¬ 
quence of increased correspondence would be a source of profit to the department. I 
find that, in the years 1864, 1865, and 1866, the correspondence between this country 
and the United States increased regularly at the rate of 10 per cent, per annum, and 
it is reasonable to suppose that with reduced postage this rate of increase will not be 
diminished. Under these circumstances, it seems to me that if the Cunard Company 
would be content to accept a lower payment in the first instance than 95,000 /., so as 
to give the department what it has endeavored to obtain, a self-supporting service 
from the beginning, the department might, in its turn, forego some portion of the 
growing revenue of future years. 

Such an arrangement as this would of course not be so satisfactory as that which 
I had at first proposed; but it would, in my opinion, be preferable to any which 
would involve the loss of the services of the Cunard Company. If they would consent 
to receive 75,000 /. in lieu of 95,000 1. for the first year, I think we might safely agree 
to increase the subsidy at the rate of five per cent, per annum (our estimated increase 
of correspondence being at the rate of 10 per cent, per annum) during the term of their 
contract. In such case the service would be self-supporting at the outset, as we 
should have to pay for the packets 75,000 l., less estimated cost of sorting on board 
3,500 /., leaving 71,500 /., to meet which we should have an estimated revenue of 
75,000 /. 

The payment for the packets would not reach the sum at first asked, until the 
seventh year of the contract, by which time the correspondence would probably have 
risen from 60 to 70 per cent.., and though from that time the cost of the packets would 
rise above what was first asked, it would always, unless I greatly err, be considerably 
within the revenue, and at the close of the contract would not exceed 12*2,000 1. 

The starting payment of 75,000 l. per annum for a direct weekly service between 
this country and New York, would contrast most favourably with the^ayment of 
173,000 I. for the existing services, and the maximum payment of 122,m)0 /., which 
would not be reached until 11 years from this time, might even then, I think, be 
regarded as moderate. 

I should be glad to receive authority to negotiate with Messrs. Cunard, Burns, & 
Maclver on these terms. 

I have, &c. 


(Signed) MONTROSE. 

The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, <fc. <f-c. fie. 


No. 34. 


The Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasuri/. 


General Post Office, 28 November 1867. 

My Lords: With reference to Mr. Tilley’s letter of yesterday’s date, respecting a 
communication which had been addressed direct to Mr. Ward Hunt by Mr. William 
Inman, of Liverpool, on the subject of his tender for the North American mail packet 
service, I have now the honor to transmit to y r ou the accompanying copy of a letter 
and its enclosure, which Mr. Inman has addressed to this office on the same subject. 

I request that your Lordships will be pleased to state what reply you would wish 
me to make to this letter. 

The observations contained in Mr. Tilley’s letter above referred to, apply equally 
to this further communication from Mr Inman, and it seems to me unnecessary to 
trouble your Lordships with any additional remarks. 

I have, &c. 

(Signed) 

The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, «fc. d-c. <fc. 


MONTROSE. 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


203 


[Enclosure in No. 34. ] 


Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steamship Company, 

62 and 63 Tower Buildings, 

Liverpool, 26 November 1867. 

Sir: I have the honor to address you on the subject of the North American mail 
service for which I tendered, on the 1st October, in accordance with the forms of 
tender prescribed by his Grace the Postmaster General. 

I understand that an offer for a portion of the service referred to had been sent in 
by the Cunard Company, not according to the form of tender prescribed, but offering 
to convey the mails weekly out and home, for a period of 10 years, at 95,000 L a year; 
and that this offer is receiving favourable consideration. 

While, however, 1 am quite ready to abide by my tender, it is clear such an inequality 
of payment, and such undue preference in favour of the Cunard Company, would 
enable them to compete unfairly with us in the general Atlantic trade. 

Having tendered in the precise mode and form prescribed by Her Majesty’s Govern¬ 
ment in their advertisement, I think myself justified, with great respect, in requesting 
that I may be placed on as favourable a footing as the Cunard Company, who have 
failed to tender in the mode and time which were so prescribed; and I base my request 
in addition upon the obvious ground that fairness requires all competitors to be treated 
equally, for the following reasons: 

First. That my Company’s steamers are now in every respect as good as those of the 
Cunard Company, while a contract for a term of years securing to my Company a fixed 
payment will enable it to add still finer and more powerful steamers to its fleet. 

Second. That any reduction in Transatlantic postage for the benefit of the public 
should not be cast exclusively upon any particular steamship owner conveying the 
letters; but, if not borne by the public department, which adopts the reduction on 
public grounds, it should at all events be borne by such steamship owners equally. 

For these reasons I respectfully ask, that instead of the agreement of which the draft 
has been sent to me, a Contract as favourable as that to be granted to the Cunard Com¬ 
pany may be entered into with me, in order that the merits of each Company may be 
fairly compared and considered, and that both may be placed on an equal footing in 
this matter, where au equal service is to be performed by, and an equal benefit to the 
public is to derived from, the due performance by each contract or of his Contract. 

It may not be out of*place for me to mention that this Company has existed as an Eng¬ 
lish Atlantic Ocean Steamship Company since 1850 ; and, that you may judge of the 
character of the Company, and its financial ability to perform any engagements it 
may enter into, I beg to enclose a list of the partners composing it. 


I am, &c. 

(Signed) 

The Secretary, General Post Office, London. 


WILLIAM INMAN. 


Liverpool, New York , and Philadelphia Steamship Company, Nos. 62 if 63 Tower Build¬ 
ing s, Liverpool. 


PROPRIETORS. 


William Inman. 

Charles Inman. 

Thomas Inman, M. D 

T. Langton Birley- 

Charles Birley. 

A. Leyland Birley ... 

Robert S. Lepper- 

John C. Lepper. 

Charles W. Lepper- 

William Langton. 



Liverpool. 

Ditto. 

Ditto. 

Justices of the Peace fori 
the County Palat ine, Lan- | 

caster . 

Kirkham. Preston and 
Manchester. 

| Belfast. 

Liverpool. 


Thomas S. Ovvden. London.. 

Tod and M'Gregor.- Glasgow ... 

James Kay .j Turton Tower, Lancashire.. 

William Valentine.[ Belfast. 


William Stobart.j County Durham 


William Inman 


Justice of the Peace for the County 
of Chester. 

A Managing Director, Bank of 
Liverpool. 


. | 8-64ths 

Flax Mills, Cotton Mills, ; 7-64ths 
and General Merchants | 3-64ths 

J 

Flax Mills. 

i Justice of the Peace for the County 
of Lancaster. 

J Gentleman. 

Steam Ship Builders. 

Gentleman.. 

J Managing Director, Northern Bank¬ 
ing Company 

| Coal Owner, Justice of the Peace 
for the County of Durham. 

In trust for E. T, Wakefield, Bar¬ 
rister, London. 


12-64ths. 
2-64 th s. 

2- 64tbs. 

1 

)18-64ths. 

J 

10-64ths. 

3- 64ths. 

5-64ths. 

5-64ths. 

4- 64ths. 
l-64th. 

1-64th. 

l-64th. 


64-64ths. 











































204 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


No. 35. 

The Secretary to the Treasury to the Postmaster General. 


Treasury Chambers, 28 November 1867. 

My Lord Duke: 1 am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s 
Treasury to acquaint you that my Lords have given full consideration to your Grace’s 
letters of the 19th ami 20th instant, relating to the conveyance of mails between this 
country and the United States of America, by the Hamburgh American Steamship 
Company and Messrs. Cunard, Burns & Maclver. 

I am desired to state that the refusal of the Post Office authorities at Washington 
to make arrangements for the payment to the Imperial Post Office of the sea postage 
earned by the vessels of Messrs. Cunard &■ Co., on their homeward voyage, during 
the proposed term, appears to their Lordships to lessen the inducement to them to 
sanction a contract with that Company, and that their reluctance to do so would not 
be overcome if there w T ere reason to believe that the modifications now suggested by 
your Qrace were likely to be accepted by the Company. 

I am further desired to state that the great responsibility that rests with their 
Lordships, as to making a proper provision for the conveyance of mails from this 
country to the United States on Saturdays, at the termination of the present contract 
(so that the mercantile community may not be deprived of efficient postal accommo¬ 
dation on the day on which so large a portion of the outward correspondence has for 
many years been sent), has induced them to put themselves in personal communica¬ 
tion, through me as their financial secretary, with Mr. John Burns, one of the part¬ 
ners of Messrs. Cunard & Co., and that Mr. Burns has, in the most handsome manner, 
expressed to me his will ingness, if possible, to meetthe views of the Government under 
the circumstances in which they are placed. 

Relying on this assurance, my Lords are now pleased to authorize your Grace to 
offer to Messrs. Cunard & Co. the sum of 80,000 /. for a weekly service to New York, 
sailing from Queenstown, as at present, for a period of 12 months, to commence at the 
expiration of their present contract; Messrs. Cunard & Co. to account to the Imperial 
Post Office for the sea postage which they may earn on the homeward voyage, and to 
provide sorting rooms, and board the sorting officer, as proposed in their original 
offer. 

Upon hearing from your Grace, my Lords will give a final answer respecting the 
tender of the Hamburgh American Company. 

1 am, Ac. 


(Signed) GEORGE WARD HUNT*. 
His Grace the Postmaster General, $-c. <fc. J*c. 


No. 36. 


The Secretary to the Treasury to the Postmasteo• General. 


Treasury Chambers, 29 November 1867. 

My Lord Duke : With reference to your Grace’s letter of the 28th instant, trans¬ 
mitting copies of a letter, and of its enclosure from Mr. William Inman on the subject 
of his tender for the North American Mail Packet Service, I am directed by the Lords 
Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury to request that you will inform Mr. Inman 
that, had their Lordships thought proper to make a contract for a term with Messrs. 
Cunard for the conveyance of mails to New York, they would have been prepared to 
have granted him, at the expiration of six months, a contract for a like term for a pay¬ 
ment calculated on a similar principle. 

Such, however, not being the case, my Lords request that your Grace will take 
steps for the execution of the articles of agreement between yourself and Mr. Inman 
forthwith, as well as those to be entered into with the North German Lloyd Com¬ 
pany. 

1 am, Ac. 


(Signed) 

His Grace the Postmaster General, $c. fyc. ,$V. 


GEORGE WARD HUNT. 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


205 


No. 37. 

1 he Secretary to the Post Office to the Secretary to the Treasury. 


General Post Office, 30 November 1807. 

Sin: 1 am directed by the Postmaster General to inform you that, in accordance 
with the request made in your letter of the 28th instant, his Grace has made an oiler 
to Messrs. Canard, Burns & Maclver of the sum of 80,000 1. for a weekly mail service 
to and from New York, for a period of 12 months, on the understanding that the 
whole amount received by them for sea postage of homeward mail, shall be paid 
over to this Department, and I am to transmit, for the information of the Lords Com¬ 
missioners of the Treasury, a copy of the reply received from Messrs. Canard, accept¬ 
ing this offer. 

I am, at the same Jime, to enclose, for the approval of the Lords Commissioners, a 
draft contract which has been prepared for this service. 

I have, &-C. 


(Signed) .1. TILLEY. 

George Ward HVnt, Esq., M. P., JV. tfc. <fc. Treasury. 


[Enclosure in No. 37.] 


London, 30 November 1867. 

Sir: We beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter to us of this date, and hereby 
to intimate that we accept the offer therein made to us, for the performance by us of a 
weekly service from Liverpool to and from New York direct (calling at Queenstown 
on the outward and homeward voyages) during one year after the termination of 
our present mail contract, for a payment of Eighty thousand pounds sterling (80,000 1.), 
we undertaking to pay over to Her Majesty’s Postmaster General the entire amount 
of any sea postage which we may receive on account of*the conveyance of the home¬ 
ward mails. 


We have, &c. 


The Secretary of the Post Office. 


CCNARD. BCRNS & MACIYER, 

per JOHN BURNS. 


No. 38. 

• 7 he Secretary to the Treasury to the Postmaster General. 

Treasury Chambers, 3 December 1867. 

My Lord Duke : The Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury have con¬ 
sidered the Draft Contract, enclosed in your letter of the 30th ultimo, with Messrs. 
Cunard, Burns & Maclver, for the conveyance of mails to New York. 

Thev direct me to signify to your Grace their approval, and I am to authorise you 
to execute the said Contract without further delay. 

I am, &c. 

(Signed) GEORGE WARD HUNT. 

. The Postmaster General, Jc. $c. $c. 


No. 39. 

The Secretary to the Treasury to the Postmaster General. 

Treasury Chambers, 3 December 1867. 

My Lord Duke: The Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury have con¬ 
sidered the reasons upon which you found your recommendation, that they should 
not accept the tender of the Hamburgh American Steamship Company, and they 
acquiesce in your Grace’s opinion. 

Their Lordships understand further that if the public desire to make use of the 





206 


AMERICAN SHIRRING INTERESTS. 


vessels of the Company, they can do so by specially addressing their letters for such 
vessels. 

I am therefore to authorise your Grace to intimate to the said Company that Her 
Majesty’s Government are not prepared to accept their offer for the conveyance of 
mails to New York. 

I am, &c. 

(Signed) GEORGE WARD HUNT. 

His Grace the Postmaster General. 


No. 40. 

Mr. Joint Huron to the Lord* Commissioners of the Treasury. 


London, 3 December 1867. 

My Lords: Ill making the arrangements now concluded with Her Majesty’s Gov¬ 
ernment, for the conveyance of the North American mails, I beg to state that I have 
been actuated by a desire to meet the wishes of the Government, and have accord¬ 
ingly agreed, on the part of my firm, to conduct the service between Liverpool and 
New York, upon exceptional terms, adapted to meet the exigencies of the public 
service, and to relieve the Government from a difficulty which had arisen, owing to 
the American Post Office not having acceded to the proposition of Her Majesty’s 
Government for an arrangement with them for the carriage of the homeward mails, 
and which necessarily prevented Her Majesty’s Government from completing an 
agreement for a more permanent service; and I take this opportunity of stating that, 
whilst I have cheerfully acquiesced in the views of the Government, I do not wish 
these arrangements, which have been made to meet a special case, to form a precedent 
for any future action which it may be incumbent upon my firm to take in regard to 
postal contracts. 

I have, &c. 

JOHN BURNS. 


The Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury. 


No. 41. 

lhe Secretary to the Treasury to Mr. John Burns. 


Treasury Chambers, 3 December 1867. 

Sir: In reply to your letter of this day’s date, I am commanded by the Lords Com¬ 
missioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury to inform you that my Lords readily admit that 
your firm have met the Government with regard to the conveyance of the North 
American mails in a spirit whereby they have been enabled, in a position of consid¬ 
erable difficulty, to conclude a Contract that will, in their judgment, be advantageous 
to the public, and they are willing to put on record their opinion that, in any future 
negotiation, your tirm ought not to be prejudiced by the terms upon which the pres¬ 
ent Contract has been based. 

I am, &c. 


John Burns, Esq., 

on behalf of Messrs. Canard , Burns 4" Maclver. 


GEORGE WARD HUNT. 


(Indorsed:) Postal contracts. Copies of Contracts entered into between Her Maj¬ 
esty’s Postmaster-General and the North German Lloyd, the Liverpool, New York, 
and Philadelphia Steamship Company, and Messrs. Cunard, Burns & Maclver, for 
the Conveyance of Mails to New York ; and, of the Contract entered into between Her 
Majesty’s Postmaster General and the Liverpool, New York, and Philadelphia Steam¬ 
ship Company for the Conveyance of Mails to Halifax, with Copies of the Correspond¬ 
ence relating thereto. (Mr. Hunt.) Ordered, by the House of Commons, to be 
Printed, 6 December 1867. 




AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


207 


WEST INDIA AND BRAZIL MAILS. 

• 

Return to an Order of the Honourable the House of Commons, dated 29 June 1868 ;— for Copies 
“ of a Contract, dated the 26 th day of June 1868, entered into between the Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral and the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company, extending their Contracts for the Convey¬ 
ance of the II est India and Brazil Mails for a further Period,” 11 and of Correspondence 
relating thereto .” 

Treasury Chambers, 29 June 1868. G. Sulater-Booth. 

Ordered, by the House of Commons, to be Printed, 29 June 1K68. 

I. 

Copy of Contract, dated 26th June 1868, entered into between the Postmaster General and the 
Royal Mail Steam Packet Company, extending their Contracts for the Conveyance of the 
West India and Brazil Mails for a f urther Period; with the Treasury Minute thereon. 

No. 1. 

Copy of Contract. 

West India and Brazil Mails. 

Articles of agreement made this 26th day of June in the year 1868 between the Most Noble 
James Duke of Montrose Her Ma jesty’s Postmaster General of the one part and the Royal 
Mail Steam Packet Company (hereinafter called the Company ) of the other part: 

Whereas by Articles of Agreement under Seal dated the 13tli day of July 1863 a 
Contract was entered into between the Postmaster General and the Company (here¬ 
inafter referred to as the Brazil Contract) for the conveyance by the Company of Her 
Majesty's Mails between Southampton and Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Ayres aud for 
the performance of other services upon the terms therein mentioned and it was by the 
articles now in recital provided that the said Contract should commence on the 1st 
day of January 1864 and should continue in force for seven years and then determine 
if the Postmaster General should by writing under his hand or under the hand of the 
Secretary or one of the Assistant Secretaries of the Post Office for the time being have 
given to the Company or if the Company should have given to the Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral 24 calendar months’ previous notice in writing that sucb Contract should so de¬ 
termine but if neither party should give any such notice that such Contract should 
continue in force even after the said term of seven years until the expiration of a 24 
calendar mouths’ notice in writing as aforesaid given at any time by either of the par¬ 
ties thereto to the other of them : And whereas by articles of agreement under seal dated 
the 22nd day of July 1863 a Contract wasentered into between the said Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral and the Company (hereinafter referred to as the West India Contract) for the con¬ 
veyance by the Company of Her Majesty’s Mails between Southampton and the Island of 
St." Thomas and divers other places in the West Indies and for the performance of other 
services upon the terms therein mentioned and it was by the articles now in recital 
provided that the said Contract should commence on the 1st day of January 1864 and 
should continue in force for six years and then determine if the Postmaster General 
should by writing under his hand or under the hand of the Secretary or one of the 
Assistant Secretaries of the Post Office for the ti;ne being have given to the Com¬ 
pany or if the Company should have given to the Postmaster General 24 calendar 
months’ previous notice* in writing that such Contract should so determine but if 
neither the Postmaster General nor the Company should have given any such notice 
that such Contract should continue in force even after the said term of six years until 
the expiration of a 24 calendar months’ notice in writing as aforesaid given at any 
time after the expiration of the first- five years from the 31st day of December 1863 by 
either of the parties thereto to the other of them : And whereas the principal and cen¬ 
tral packet station and establishment of the Company in the West Indies in connec¬ 
tion with the last-mentioned Contract is at present at the Island and Port of St. 
Thomas and it is apprehended that by reason of the unhealthiness of the said island 
or of the port thereof it may become desirable to remove the said central station and 
establishment to some other island and port: And whereas it has been agreed between 
the parties hereto that the said Contracts shall be modified in manner hereinafter ap- 


208 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


pearing: Now these presents witness: And it is hereby agreed and declared between 
and by the parties hereto as follows (that is to say):— 

1. With respect to each of the hereinbefore-mentioned Contracts it is hereby agreed 
and declared that the same shall continue in force until the .list day of December 18/4 
inclusive and shall then determine if the Postmaster General shall by writing under 
his hands or under the hand of the secretary or one of the assistant secretaries tor the 
time being of the Post Office have given to the Company or it the Company shall have 
given to the Postmaster General 24 calendar months’notice in writing that such Con¬ 
tract shall so determine but if neither party shall have given any such notice such 
Contract shall continue in force after the 31st day ot December 1874 until the expira¬ 
tion of a 25 calendar months’ notice in writing as aforesaid given at any time by either 
of the parties hereto to the other of them. 

2. If in any year during the continuance of the hereinbefore-mentioned Contracts 
or either of them the entire fund arising from the subsidies or subsidy payable there¬ 
under to the Company and from traffic receipts earned by the Company in connection 
directly or indirectly with voyages made or ships’ depots or establishments used in 
the performance of such Contracts or Contract and trom interest on any reserved fund 
which shall accrue after the date of these presents and from any balance that may 
have been left available for future dividends after the last declaration of a dividend 
shall after deducting working expenses incuired during such year including the usual 
allowance for depreciation and repairs and renewal exceed the sum necessary for the 
payment of a dividend of 8 per cent, on the capital employed by the Company in the 
performance of the said Contracts or Contract then and in every such case the Com¬ 
pany shall pay to the Postmaster General a sum equal, to one-half of such excess. 

3. For the purposes of the last preceding clause the capital employed by the Com¬ 
pany in the performance of the hereinbefore mentioned Contracts shall be taken to 
be the sum of 900,000 l. 

4. The Company shall be at liberty to include in their working expenses any sum 
not exceeding the yearly sum of 45,000 /. (whether the sum shall he actually paid or 
merely set apart as an insurance fund) in respect of the insurance of ships employed 
under the hereinbefore mentioned Contracts and the Postmaster General shall not be 
entitled in any case to participate in any profits accruing from any insurance fund set 
apart in conformity with the provisions of this clause. 

• 5. During the continuance of the said- Contracts or either of them the Company 

shall keep their accounts and books of account aud statements of capital revenue and 
expenditure in the manner in which the said books accounts and statements are kept 
at the date of these presents. 

6. The Postmaster General aud his officers and agents shall at all reasonable times 
have access to the books of account and accounts of the Company in the same man¬ 
ner and to the same extent as if he and they were directors of the Company and if at 
any time any question shall arise between the Postmaster General or his officers and 
agents and the Company as to the amount (if any) to be paid to the Postmaster Gen¬ 
eral under the preceding clauses of this contract such question shall be referred to 
arbitration in manner provided by the 27th danse of the West India Contract. 

7. On or as soon as conveniently may be after the 1st day of April in every year 
during the continuance of the said contracts or either of them an account shall be 
made out of the amount (if any) payable to the Postmaster General under this Con¬ 
tract and such amount (if any) shall be deducted from the next quarterly payment 
due to the Company. 

8. The Company shall upon the requisition of the Postmaster General at any time 
during the continuance of the West India Contract remove their principal and central 
packet .station and establishment from the island and port of St. Thomas aforesaid to 
such other island and port as the Postmaster General shall direct and shall effect and 
complete such removal within a reasonable time after the Postmaster General shall 
have given them notice in writing requiring them so to do, and any such notice may 
be under the hand either of the Postmaster General or of the secretary or one of the 
assistant secretaries of the time being of the Post Office. 

9. In the event of such removal it shall be lawful for the Postmaster General to make 
such reasonable modifications of the services agreed to be performed by the West In¬ 
dia Contract as he shall consider necessary or expedient by such removal and the 
Company shall not be entitled to any increased subsidy or remuneration in respect of 
any such modification. Provided always that the Postmaster General shall by notice 
signed as aforesaid give at least three calendar months’ notice to the company of any 
such intended modification as aforesaid. Provided also that if the company and the 
Postmaster General shall differ as to the reasonableness of any such proposed modi¬ 
fication such difference shall be settled by arbitration in manner provided by the 
27th clause of the said Contract. 

10. If any such removal shall take place during the continuance of the said Con¬ 
tract and if by reason thereof the said Company shall incur any additional outlay of 
capital the Postmaster General shall after such removal shall have taken place grant 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


209 


to the Company such further extension of the term of the said Contract as shall 
afford them a fair compensation for such outlay and in case of difference the term of 
such extended Contract shall he settled by arbitration in the manner provided by the 
27th clause of the said Contract. 

In witness whereof the said Postmaster General hath hereunto set his hand and seal 
•and the said Royal Mail Steam Packet Company have caused their common seal to be 
hereunto affixed the day and year above written. 

MONTROSE. [Postmaster General’s Seal.] 

Signed sealed and delivered by the within-named James Duke of Montrose Her 
Majesty’s Postmaster General in the presence of 

J. L. Du Plat Taylor, 

Private Secretary, General Post Office. 

the common seal of Alie within-named Royal Mail Steam Packet Company was 
hereunto affixed in the presence of 

[Company’s Seal.] 

J. M. Lloyd, Secretary. 

Z. Brooke, Solicitor's Department, General Post Office , London.. 


No. 2. 

Copy of Treasury Minute, dated 29th June, 1868. 

Let a copy of the above Contract and of the correspondence relating thereto, which 
sufficiently sets forth the grounds upon which their Lordships have authorised the Con¬ 
tract, be laid upon the Table of the House of Commons. 

Inform Postmaster General of the date when the contract, &c. is laid upon the 
Table of the House of Commons. 


II. 

COPY OF CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE EXTENDING OF THE CONTRACTS OF THE 

ROYAL MAIL STEAM PACKET COMPANY FOR THE CONVEYANCE OF THE WEST INDIA 

AND BRAZIL MAILS, FOR A FURTHER PERIOD. 

No. 1. 

The Secretary to the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company to the Secretary to the Treasury. 

Royal Mail Steam Packet Company, 55, Moorgate-street, 

London , E. C. 20 November 1867. 

Sir, Her Majesty’s Government have, without doubt, become aware of the serious 
disaster and consequent hea # vy loss which has befallen this Company through the re¬ 
sults of the recent hurricane at and near St. Thomas. 

Full particulars of this event have not yet reached the directors of this Company, 
but they know that four ships, which originally cost 181,926 l., have been wrecked, 
and that two others have been dismasted, and a large amount of stores, buildings, 
and other property in the harbour and on shore destroyed. 

To replace properly these vessels and property, an expenditure of not much less than 
250,000 l. will be requisite. 

The Court of Directors have had under their most anxious consideration the course 
which, under these circumstances, they ought, both in the interest of the public serv¬ 
ice and of their proprietary, to take ; and it will be manifest to Her Majesty’s Gov¬ 
ernment that, with Contracts only having two (and to a smaller extent, three) years 
to run, it would be unwise in the Court to incur a large capital expenditure, especi¬ 
ally in the way of construction of new ships. Such new vevssels could not be placed 
on the station for at least a year to come, and thus might only be employed for a little 
more than 12 mouths. 

The only course, therefore, available for the Directors, in view of the termination 
of the present Contract, would be the expensive and unsatisfactory one of chartering 
vessels for the service. 

Under these circumstances, and feeling that the severe blow which has fallen on a 
Company distinguished for the punctuality of its service,' audits readiness to meet the 
wishes of Her Majesty’s Government at all times, will give it a valid claim for consid- 

067 - 14 ^ 





210 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


eratiou, the Court of Directors have resolved to ask Her Majesty’s Government to 
grant the Company a live years’ extension of its present Contract, i, e., to the end of 
1872 certain, and thenceforward to be at two years’ notice. For a portion of the service 
this would be only four years’ extension, but the Directors conceive that it would be 
more convenient to the Government and to the Company that the contracts for the 
whole service should become terminable simultaneously. 

I am desired to add that the Court of Directors have felt some hesitation in making 
this proposal in view of the present state of theCompany’s income. Although, during 
the American War, and before the competition of the highly subsidized French Com¬ 
pany, this Company earned sufficient 10 yield a satisfactory dividend for its share¬ 
holders, the case has been very different during the last two years. In 1866, the ag¬ 
gregate profit after writing off the customary per centages for depreciation and insur¬ 
ance, was only 79,689/. 7s. 3d., and the dividend was, with the cognizance of the 
shareholders, increased by bringing to its aid part of a fund created to provide 
against loss on the sale of old ships. In the first half of the current year the pro¬ 
fits were only 1,244/. 5s. 5 d., and a similar operation was affected in aid of dividend, 
a reduction also being made in the amount written off for depreciation. The income 
of the subsequent quarter, viz., May to September last, shows a still further reduc¬ 
tion of receipts. But the directors trust that such a general improvement in commer¬ 
cial affairs will succeed to the present to depression, as will, if a five years’ extension 
be secured to the Company, afford to the proprietary the prospect of a moderate rate 
of profit. 

In order that their statement of the present position of the Company may be veri¬ 
fied, the Directors will be most happy to submit the books to the Government on the 
understanding that the investigation is made in view of an extension of the Con¬ 
tracts. 


I have, &c. 


(Signed) 


G. W. Hunt, Esq.,M. I’., Secretary, 

Her Majesty's Treasury , Whitehall. 


J. M. LLOYD, 

Secretary. 


No. 2. 

Copy of Treasury Minute, dated 21 si November 1867. 

Write to Secretary of the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company that, under the cir¬ 
cumstances mentioned in his letter, and which they had already become acquainted 
with, my Lords are disposed to entertain the proposition of the directors. They are, 
however, of opinion that it may be a question whether an extension of the term of 
contract should not be accompanied with a reduction of the subsidy, and in this view 
they have instructed the Postmaster General to cause an examination of the Com¬ 
pany’s books, to be immediately undertaken in accordance with the concluding par¬ 
agraph of Her Majesty’s letter. 

My Lords reserve for further consideration whether any other conditions should be 
imposed upon the Company when the contract is renewed. 

Write to the Postmaster General, inclosing copy of the letter from the Royal Mail 
Steam Packet Company, and state, that under the circumstances of the fearful dis¬ 
aster referred to in the letter of the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company, my Lords 
think they would be justified in entertaining the proposition of the directors. Re¬ 
quest that his Grace will give instructions for the examination of the books of the 
Company to enable their Lordships to judge whether a reduction of the subsidy 
should be a condition of an extension of the terms, upon learning the result of such 
examination their Lordships will consult his Grace as to what arrangement should 
be proposed to the Company. 


No. 3. 

The Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 

General Post Office, 26 December *1867. 
My Lords : In accordance with the desire expressed by your Lordships in your let¬ 
ter of the 21st ultimo, I have caused an examination to be made of the books of the 




AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


211 


Royal Mail Steam Packet Company with a view of enabling your Lordships to judge 
whether, it the request of the Company for a live years’ extension of their present 
contracts tor the conveyance of the West India and Brazil mails be acceded to, a re¬ 
duction of the subsidies should be made a condition of such extension of term. 

I intrusted this duty to Mr. Scudamore, than whom no one, in my opinion, could 
perform it more ably, and, in transmitting to your Lordships the report which he has 
made, after completing his inquiries, I feel assured that you will acquiesce in that 
opinion. 

Mr. Scudamore seems, so far as was referred to him, to have exhausted the subject. 

I have, &c. 


(Signed) MONTROSE. 

The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 


[Enclosure in No. 3.1 

I have examined the accounts of the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company, and beg 
to submit the following observations : 

1. The circumstances and position of the Company resemble in many striking par¬ 
ticulars those of the Peninsular and Oriental Company, and afford a strong confirma¬ 
tion of the opinion which I expressed in my report on the affairs of that Company. 

In the first place the ratio of each principal item of expenditure to the total expend¬ 
iture is, in the case of both Companies, so nearly the same as to warrant the belief 
that both are conducted upon sound and well-recognized principles, and that the re¬ 
verses which both have sustained are due to external causes only. 

2. In the second place, the external causes of misfortune have been the same in both 
cases. 

Both Companies have suffered somewhat from the general stagnation of trade, but 
much more from the competition of the highly subsidised French Companies. In both 
cases an important item of revenue, that which arises from the conveyance of specie, 
has been greatly reduced, partly by the competition of the French companies, and 
partly by a sudden diversion of the current of specie from its former channels. 

In each case, the falling off in the receipts from passengers has been accompanied 
by a rise in the price of provisions, and, consequently, by an increase in the cost of 
victualling passengers: and in each case (though to a less degree in the case of the 
Royal Mail Company than in that of the Peninsular and Oriental Company) there 
has been a rise in the cost of coal. 

3. With both Companies a subsidy is absolutely necessary to the maintenance of 
the service required from them. 

In my report upon the accounts of the Peninsular and Oriental Company I showed 
that the revenue, exclusive of subsidy, which the Company expected to earn in the 
performance of the services required from them would cover only 85 per cent, of the 
expenditure proper to those services. 

The actual revenue, exclusive of subsidy, of the Royal Mail Company in the year 
1864, the period of their greatest prosperity, amounted to 90 per cent, of their expend¬ 
iture, but in the following year it fell to 85 per cent., and in the next to 79 per cent., 
whilst in the present year it will be barely 70 per cent, of their expenditure. 

It is clear then, that in the case of the Royal Mail Company, as in that of the 
Peninsular and Oriental Company, the ordinary revenue of the Company has in no 
case sufficed to meet, and is now very much below the expenses of the services which 
they have to perform. 

4. Having offered these* general observations upon the points of resemblance in the 
circumstances of the two Companies, I come now to examine more closely the condi¬ 
tion of the Royal Mail Company. 

The Company were incorporated in the year 1839 and have held contracts for the 
conveyance of the West Indian Mails since 1841, and for the conveyance of the Bra¬ 
zilian' and Plate Mails since 1850, that is for periods of 57 and 18 years respectively. 

They had, prior to the hurricane of October last, a fleet of 19 ships, the average 
tonnage and power of which was somewhat greater than the average tonnage and 
powerof the vessels belonging to the Peninsular and Oriental Company. Of these 
19 ships, four, viz., the “ Rhone,” “ Danube,” “Douro,” and “Arno,” which cost in 
all about 300,000 /., had been brought into service since the 1st January 1865. 

5. The dividends paid by the Company were for many years moderate. 

In the vears 1858-59, 1860 and 1861, their dividend was at the rate of 6 l. 13 s. id. 
per C ent and was derived solely from ordinary profits and interest on investments. 

In 186*2 they were enabled to pay 6 /. 13 s. 4 d. out of ordinary profits and interest, 
and 5 I per cent, out of their insurance account, but in 1863 they paid in addition to 


212 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


5 Z. per cent, from their insurance account a dividend of 15/. per cent, from their or 
dinary profits and investments. 

In this year they could have borne an abatement of 60,000/. from their postal sub¬ 
sidies and yet have paid (irrespectively of their insurance fund) a dividend of more 
than 8 Z. per cent. 

In the year 1864. they did suffer an abatement of 60,000/. from their postal subsi¬ 
dies, but their earnings from trade were so large in this year that notwithstanding 
the change of Contract they paid a dividend of a little more than 10 per cent, out of 
orninary profits and interest, together with a further dividend off)/, per cent, from 
their insurance fund. 

In this year, then, they could ha ve borne a further abatement of 100,000 /. from the 
postal subsidies, and yet have paid 8 /.percent., irrespectively of their insurance fund. 

In the following year, 1865, the competition of the French Company, and the diver¬ 
sion of the Californian specie from the royal mail steamers to its former course of 
transmission told seriously upon their earnings, but even then their dividend from 
ordinary profits and interest was rather more than 14 /. percent., in addition to which 
they paid 7 /. 10 s. pm- cent, from their insurance fund. 

In this year, then, they could have borne an abatement of 55,000/. from their postal 
subsidies, and yet have paid, irrespectively of their insurance fund, a dividend of 8/. 
per cent. 

In the next year a still f urther falling off in their trade occurred, and their ordinary 
profits and interest produced a dividend of only 9 /. per cent. This dividend the 3 r 
supplemented by taking as much as won In produce 1 /. 13 s. 4 d. percent, from the gen¬ 
eral reserve fund, and 5 /. 16 s. 8 d. per cent, from their insurance account. 

Supposing the shares of the Company to have been at par in 1861, purchasers at 
that time must at the close of the year 1866 have got back the whole of their capital, 
and 5 /. per cent, interest upon it. 

6. If this state of things could have continued, it is clear that the Government 
would have had a right to look for a reduction of the postal subsidies, and it is prob¬ 
able, I think, that the Company would have agreed to reduce their terms. 

But the following comparative statement of their revenue and expenditure for the 
present year, and the year 1864, will show that this period of unexampled prosperity 
came to an abrupt close at the end of the year 1866. 


Items. 

1864. 

1867. 

Decrease 

of 

Revenue. 

Subsidy. 

Passenger Freight. 

Goods Freight. 

Specie Freight. 

£. 

217,160 
341,752 
139, 962 
133, 481 

£. 

208, 926 
290, 506 
118, 382 
72, 500 

* £. 

8, 234 
51, 246 
21, 580 
60, 981 

Expenditure. £. 

678, 665 

688, 923 

142, 041 


Increase 

of 

Expenditure. 


£. 


10, 258 


Thus in the present year the profits of the Company are less than they were in 1864 
by tin* sum of 152,000 /., a sum nearly sufficient to produce 17 Z. per cent, of dividend, 
By the help of a small balance brought forward from last year, by a further draft 
on their reserve fund, and with the interest on their investments, the Company will 
have for this year a dividend out of the ordinary profits of 2/. 13.s. 4d.,and out of the 
insurance fund of 3 /. 13 s. 4 d. per cent., making a total dividend this vear of 6 /. 6 s. 8 d., 
as compared with a total dividend in 1864 of 24 /. 3*. 4 d. per cent/ 

Of the dividend paid in this year only a small fraction, less than 5 s. per cent., has 
been earned in the year, whilst of the dividend paid in 1864, at least 17/. per cent, 
was earned within that year. 

7. As the directors have asked for an extension of their contracts, it must be pre¬ 
sumed that they have reasonable grounds for expecting such a revival of trade as 
will enable them once more to earn a dividend; but it is at the same time clear, I 
think, that they would not agree, and would not be justified in agreeing, to any im¬ 
mediate reduction ot the subsidies being made, a condition of the desired extension. 

In the present year they have but. just made both ends meet, and if their subsidies 
be reduced, their income will not at present cover their expenditure. Whilst how- 
e\ei, I am of opinion that their affairs will not admit of any immediate reduction 
in the amount of theii subsidies, I think that it their contracts were extended thev 
might fairly be required, in the event of their profits, during the extended term of 
y.omiact. being laised, by revival of trade or other causes, above a stipulated amount 
• "bare the excess with the Government. 














4 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 213 

lo the further consideration of this point I will presently return. 

When the Lords ot the Treasury, on the 24th April 1863, authorized the 
I ost Othce to accept the tender of the Royal Mail Company for the present mail serv¬ 
ices between this country and the West Indies, they appear to have been moved 
thereto by the consideration that the said services “ would have the advantage of re¬ 
taining to the country at home, to its West Indian Colonies, and to the British resi¬ 
dents in South and Central America, the whole of the existing communications, ex- * 
cept the branch between Jamaica and Honduras, and that without any diminution of 
speed, while at the same time a material saving would be effected in the existing 
cost.” 

2. It is abundantly clear now, on a review of the whole circumstances of the Com- 
Pany, that this saying of 60,000 l. per annum could not have been effected, the rapidity, 
frequency, and efficiency ot the communication being at the same time maintained, 
it the American war had not thrown into the hands of the Company a new and verv 
lucrative trade. 

I have already shown that in the years 1858, 1859, I860, and 1861, the dividend of 
the Company was at the rate of 6/. 13 s. 4 d. percent. For the payment of such a 
dividend a sum ot 60,000 1. is required, and consequently if the reduction of the sub- 
sidy by that amount had taken place at the end ot’1857 instead of at the end of 1863, 
the Company could have paid no dividend at all in 1858, 1859, i860, and 1861. Had 
this been so, they would have had no rivals when the services were put up to competi¬ 
tion in 1862 and 1863, for no one would have been willing to risk capital in an under¬ 
taking which, even in skilled and practised hands, had been unremunerative for four 
years, and consequently the fresh Contract with the Royal Mail Company, if made at 
all, must in such case have been made on higher instead of on lower terms. 

As it was, however, the terms of the old Contract with them had been such as to 
enable them to pay a moderate dividend, and therefore had been such as, to some 
extent, to tempt rivalry and competition. 

In view of this, but especially in view of the new trade which the Americau war 
had thrown into their hands, they were willing to submit to an abatement of 60,000 1., 
which was equivalent to a dividend of 6 1. 13 s. 4 d. per cent. 

They said, in effect, we will forego the receipt of a six per cent, dividend from 
the Post Office, because we think we can obtain an equivalent from our trade, and 
what they now ask is to be allowed an extension of their contracts on the terms 
which would have left them without a dividend in 1858, 1859, 1860, and 1861, and 
which have not enabled them to do more than balance their expenditure with their 
income in the present year. 

3. In considering this application, which is preferred after a connection with the 
Government of 27 years’ duration, the first question appears to be whether the serv¬ 
ices which the Company perform are still as advantageous to the country as they 
were in 1863, or, in other words, whether it is considered necessary that the commu¬ 
nication between this country and the West Indies, the Spanish Main, Central and 
South America, the Brazils, and the River Plate should be as frequent, as rapid, and 
as secure as heretofore. 

With a view to facilitate the solution of this question, I submit the following 
comparative statement of the trade between this country and those with which the 
Royal Mail Company maintain a communication, in the years 1862 and 1867. 

An Account of Import* and Exportsbetiveenthe United Kingdom and the Countries with which 

communication is maintained hg the Rogal Mail Steam Racked Compang in the gears 1862 

and 1867. 



Imports into United King- 

Exports from United King- 


dom. 

dom. 


Countries. 






1862. 

1867. * 

1862. 

1867. t 


£. 

£. 

£. 


British and Foreign West Indies. ... 

. 10,664,585 

12, 327, 957 

6, 301, 365 

5, 681, 012 

Mexico and Central America-- 

. 2, 027, 572 

2, 444, 765 

2, 046, 266 

3, 468, 881 

South America.. . 

. 5, 257, 526 

7, 767, 865 

1,816, 709 

4, 275, 396 

The Brazils and River Plate. 

. 6, 539, 586 

8, 680, 218 

5,197. 302 

9, 849, 402 


£. 24, 489, 269 

31, 220, 805 

15, 361,642 

21, 274, 691 


i 


*Total imports and exports in 1862. 

Total of imports and exports in 1867 - 

t Estimated from Returns for three-quarters of 1867. 


£. 39, 850, 911 
.. 52,495,496, 

















* 


214 


AMERICAN SHIPPING 


INTERESTS. 


4. If it should be thought that the communication should not be less frequent, rapid, 
and secure hereafter than it has been, it will then have to he considered whether it 
can be maintained as well, as it now is, but at lower cost, in any other way than by 
the vessels of the Royal Mail Company. At a first glance it may be thought that in 
entering on the consideration of this point, I am travelling out of the ground allotted 
to me, but it will be obvious, on reflection, that what I have written regarding the 
financial condition of the Royal Mail Company lias on this part of the whole ques¬ 
tion a bearing so important, that my statement of facts would be imperfect if it 
ended here. 

5. I assume that in whatever way it is thought right to maintain communication 
with the West Indies, &c., theservice will be direct, and not as it was at one time 
proposed to be, by way of New York. 

I am led to assume the abandonment of the proposition for a service via New York 
by a perusal of the memorials which the department received in 1862 and 1863 against 
the adoption of that route from the representatives of the entire mercantile com¬ 
munity of the kingdom. 

The memorials against the New York route were signed by upwards of 80 firms in 
Loudon (amongst which were the firms of Baring, Rothschild, Huth, Crawford, 
Goschen, Blyth, Gibbs, and Rucker), by 11 firms in Liverpool, by 33 firms in Bristol, 
by the West Indian Committee of London, the West Indian Associations of Liverpool 
and Glasgow, and the Chamber of Commerce of Glasgow. 

The proposition appears also to have caused much dissatisfaction in the Colonies. 

The memorialists in all cases took the same ground, and urged that the route would 
be longer and less secure, and that the transmission of the mails via a foreign port, 
when they could be sent direct, was objectionable in principle. 

As it is probable that these representations, which could scarcely be disregarded, 
would be renewed if the proposal for the New York route were renewed, I assume 
that the future communication with the West Indies, &c., will be by a direct service. 

The nature of the communication maintained by the Royal Mail Company is shown 
in the following statement of routes:— 


Route (A.) Outwards. —From Southampton to St. Thomas, 3,622 miles in 14 days 9 

hours , twice a month. 

(B.).-FROM ST. THOMAS TWICE A MONTH. 


To 


Miles. 


Time. 


Total 

Time. 


Jacmel (Hayti) 
Jamaica 
Colon . 



d. 

h. 

d. 

h. 

470 

1 

19 

17 

7 

255 

0 

23 

18 

14 

550 

2 

3 

21 

1 


1,275 


(B 1 ).—FROM COLON ONCE A MONTH. 


Carthagena. 


1 

18 

22 

25 

26 

'Ll 

Santa Martha. 


0 

49 






415 






(B 2 ).—FROM COLON ONCE A MONTH. 





Grey Town. 


1 

ft 


OA 






6\) 


(C.).—FROM ST. THOMAS ONCE A MONTH. 





Porto Rico. 


d. 

n 

h. 

Q 

d. 

h. 

Havana . 


A 

1 

l *) 

1 o 

17 

VeraCruz . 840 

o 

1 7 


1 I 

Tampico. ! n„c 

o 

1 i i 

OQ 

OR 

14 

17 




60 

60 


2, 083 


































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


215 


(D).—FROM ST. THOMAS TWICE A MONTH. 


St. Kitts_ 

Antigua_ 

■Guadeloupe 
Dominica... 
Martinique. 
St. Lucia ... 
Barbadoes.. 
Demerara .. 


Miles. Time. 


Total 

time. 


d. h. d. h. 


150 

0 

17 

15 

14 

70 

0 

8 

16 

0 

68 

0 

8 1 

16 

11 

53 

0 

6 

16 

18 

49 

0 

5 

17 

0 

45 

0 

5 

17 

6 

108 

0 

12 

18 

2 

392 

1 

20 j 

20 

2 

935 






St. Vincent 
Grenada... 
Trinidad .. 
Tobago_ 


(D 1 ).—EROM Sl\ LUCIA TWICE A MONTH. 


60 

0 

7 

17 

21 

84 

0 

9 

18 

8 

94 

0 

10 

19 

3 

80 

0 

15 

20 

13 

318 






Route (E).— Brazil and Hirer Plate once a month, from Southampton. 


Lisbon. 

St. Vincent (Cape Verde)_ 

Pernambuco. 

Bahia. 

Rio de Janeiro, and thence to 

Monte Video, and.. 

Buenos Ayres.. 


866 

3 

19 ; 

3 

19 

1, 560 

6 

20 

11 

10 

1, 600 

7 

0 

19 

22 

410 

1 

19 1 

22 

9 

720 ; 

3 

4 

26 

6 

1,040 1 

5 

10 

34 

8 

130 

0 

16 

36 

4 


6, 326 


It is not necessary that I should describe the homeward routes, which differ but 
slightly from the outward routes. 

It is enough to say that the entire system of communication embraces an annual 
run of 530,000 miles, and that the speed with which the voyages are performed, ranges 
from Of to 1 Of knots per hour. 

7. The following statements will show that the service, described in the foregoing 
tables of routes, has its remunerative and unremunerative sections, and that even in 
1864, the period at which the Company attained the greatest pitch of prosperity, the 
services on the Demerara and Tobago routes were carried on at a heavy loss. 

A Statement apportioning the Revenue and Expenditure of the Royal Mail Steam Packet 
Company in the Years 1864 and 1867 to the Routes traversed by the Steamers of that 
Company. 


Brazil and River Plate Routes marked (E) in foregoing Table. 


Revenue. 


1864. 

1857. 



«£. 

33,500 

£- 

33, 500 



198, 727 

193,800 

Total Earnings. 


232,227 

227, 300 

■Cost, reckoned on the assumption that it bears the 
whole cost as the mileage of the service bears to 

same proportion to the 
the total mileage of all 

194, 636 

197, 582 

Profit. 


37, 591 

29, 718 




























































216 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


Colon and Mexican Routes marked (B), (B 1 ), (B 3 ), and (C), in foregoing Plan. 


Earnings. 

1864. 

£. 

42, 271 

60, 248 
24, 293 
360, 874 

1867. 

£. 

40, 375 

57, 547 

23, 204 
234, 388 

One moiety of the subsidy proper to the service between Southampton and 

Subsidy proper to the service between St. Thomas and Colon, &c., routes 

Subsidy proper to the service between St. Thomas and Tampico. 


487, 685 

355, 514 

One moiety of cost, reckoning the cost by the mileage, of the service between 

Southampton and St. Thomas.-.. 

Cost, reckoning by mileage, of service between St. Thomas and Colon, &c — 
Ditto of service between St. Thomas and Tampico. 

Total Cost.■£• 

Protit ... £■ 

114, 403 
158, 782 

64, 025 

• 

113.089 
161, 184 

64. 993 

334, 210 

339, 266 

153, 475 

16, 248 

Demeraiia and Tobago Routes marked I) and D 1 in foregoing 

Plan. 

Earnings. 

1864. 

1867. 

One moiety of subsidy proper to service between St. Thomas and South¬ 
ampton'. .... ..... 

£. 

42, 272 

14, 576 

55, 595 

£. 

40, 376 

13, 924 

53, 200 

Subsidy proper to the routes between St. Thomas and Demerara, and St. 
Lucia and Tobago... 

Total Earnings. £. 

One moiety of cost, reckoning the cost by the mileage, of the service between 

Southampton and St. Thomas . 

Cost of services between St. Thomas and Demerara, and St. Lucia and To¬ 
bago.. 

Total Cost. £. 

ll£, 443 

107, 500 

111,404 

38, 415 

113, 089 

38, 966 

149, 819 

152, 085 

37,376 

44, 585 

SUMMARY. 

Profit. 

1864. 

1867. 

Brazil and River Plate routes. 

£. 

37, 591 

£. 

29,718 

Colon and Mexican routes. 

153, 475 

16. 248 

Total . £. 

191, 066 

45, 966 

Deduct Loss on Demerara and Tobago routes. 

37,376 

44, 585 

Net Profit.£. 

153, 690 

1,381 


8. It is obvious that a service of this kind (assuming always that it is to he main¬ 
tained with its present frequency and efficiency) must be treated by the department 
as a whole. 

To put it up to competition in sections and not as a whole would be to ensure a com¬ 
petition for the remunerative and no competition for the unremunerative sections, and 
would probably result in an increase rather than in a reduction of cost. 

9. I am strengthened in this view by a re-perusal of the printed correspondence 
between this department and the parties tendering for the services when they were 
last put up to competition. 

Practically, the department had but two tenders on that occasion, for though much 









































































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


217 


correspondence passed between it and a company calling themselves “The Maritime 
Steam Navigation Company,” and offering to convey ocean mails generally on several 
routes, yet, as this company was found to consist of but seven persons, who had sub¬ 
scribed between them a paid-up capital of 35 /., and could give no guarantee that they 
would ever be able to fulfil their undertakings, their offer was not considered to have 
any practical value. I should not have alluded to it but that, as the printed corre¬ 
spondence with the company is not accompanied by the statement of their real position 
and prospects, their offer appears in the printed papers to have an importance which 
never belonged to it. 

10. The bond fide offers which the department received were from the Royal Mail 
Company (whose offer was ultimately accepted) and from Mr. Alfred Holt, a merchant 
of Liverpool, who was engaged in West Indian trade. 

The shape into which this gentleman’s offers finally resolved themselves, after much 
correspondence, was that he would establish a communication as frequent, but not as 
rapid, as that which the Royal Mail Company maintain with the places specified in 
the routes marked B, B ! ,B 2 , C, and D, in the foregoing table, and that he would establish 
it for the sum of 161,000/. per annum, but that he could make no provision for serv¬ 
ing the places specified in the route marked D l . 

The services in the route marked (E) were not then under consideration. 

It is obvious from the terms of his tenders for the different sections of the total serv¬ 
ice, that he regarded the Colon and Mexican routes as being remunerative, and the 
Demerara and Tobago routes as being unremunerati ve ; and my analysis of the ac¬ 
counts of the Royal Mail Company shows that this view was correct. The natural 
result was that though some portions of his offer contrasted favourably, so far as price 
was concerned, with portions of the offer made by the Royal Mail Company, the offer 
of that Company was, when taken as a whole, cheaper, more comprehensive, and gen¬ 
erally more suitable to the wants of the department than his offer, and the offer of the 
Company was accordingly accepted. 

11. Since that time, the business which Mr. Holt carried on with the West Indies 
and Spanish Main has passed into the hands of the West India and Pacific Steam Ship 
Company, who, in the expectation that the department is about to terminate its Con¬ 
tracts with the Royal Mail Company, ask that the services may be put up to open 
competition, express a hope that the condition proposed for the renewal of the New 
York Postal Contract, viz :—“ That the conveying vessel shall receive a proportion of 
the postage earned in lieu of the fixed subsidy, will be adopted in any new Contract 
to the West Indies;” and finally state that they are prepared “at once to tender” 
and “ to submit offers to undertake the service at a much less expense to the country 
than is at present incurred.” 

12. At the first glance it would seem that in the face of such statements as these 
from a Company of recognised position, the department can do no less in the interest 
of the public service than put the services up to competition and take its chance of 
obtaining more favourable terms than those of the existing Contracts. 

On reflection, however, I am compelled to conclude (assuming always that the fre¬ 
quency and efficiency of the existing communication are to be maintained) that such 
a course would be hazardous and impolitic. 

13. In forming this conclusion, I have not allowed myself to be influenced by the 
fact that the West Indian and Pacific Steam Ship Company have been somewhat un¬ 
fortunate, and that their want of success is marked by a considerable depreciation in 
the value of their shares. 

They have undoubtedly had heavy losses, but they have still a considerable amount 
of subscribed, but unpaid capital, which they can call up, and they would probably 
be able to show that in the event of their obtaining Contracts, they would be able te 
obtain the means of carrying them out. Under all the circumstances, however, I 
think that they should give this satisfaction to the department before it takes, if it 
determines to take, any steps for disturbing the existing arrangements with the Royal 
Mail Company ; I do not myself think, however, that any such steps should be taken, 
and I come to this conclusion on the following grounds. 

14. It is no disparagement to the West India and Pacific Company to say that their 
vessels are not' so efficient and powerful as the vessels of the Royal Mail Company. 

The vessels of the Royal Mail Company have been built for the mail service, those 
of the West India and Pacific Company for ordinary trade. 

In ordinary trade, the Royal Mail Company must compete with their rivals at a 
disadvantage, for tlieir vessels are more costly in working, as well as in construction,, 
than ordinary trade would warrant, but the circumstances which make them least fit 
for trade make them most fit for the conveyance of mails. 

15. The fleet required by the Royal Mail Company for the maintenance of the exist¬ 
ing service is also larger than that which the West India and Pacific Company pos¬ 
sess; but of course by the requisite outlay of capital the fleet of the latter Company 
could be made as large and as powerful as that of the former. 

16. The vessels of the West India and Pacific Steam Ship Company at present run 


218 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


once ;i month to St. Thomas, Santa Martha, Cartbagena, and Colon; once a month to 
Hayti, Jamaica, Tampico, and Vera Cruz, and once a month to Barbadoes, La Gnayra, 
Puerto Cahello, Cnrayoc, Maracaibo, and Colon. 

Thus they are working entirely on the remunerative routes. 

17. In one letter to the department they complain that they have “ the very serious 
disadvantage of having to compete not only with a Company subsidised by the French 
Government, but also with the 'Royal Mail Company, which obtains a very large an¬ 
nual sum from Her Majesty’s Government;” and they add, “that the subsidy to the 
Royal Mail Company is in fact a bonus which the Company is enabled to offer to 
traders to secure the ordinary mercantile traffic.” 

18. This mode of stating the case is clearly not fair either to the Government or to 
the Royal Mail Company. 

The West India and Pacific Company are free from, whilst the Royal Mail Company 
are bound by the restrictions of the postal service, restrictions which always tend to 
increased cost, and often tend to cut off revenue. 

The West India Company are working on remunerative routes only; tbe Royal 
Mail Company are working on remunerative and unremunerative routes alike, and 
with equal efficiency on both. 

It is as a compensation for these disadvantages that a subsidy is paid to the Royal 
Mail Company, and my analysis of their accounts shows that in or dinary years the com¬ 
pensation is not too great ; and it is certain that if the West India Company were to 
tender for the services now performed by the Royal Mail Company, they would have to 
take these disadvantages into consideration (supposing always that it is thought de¬ 
sirable to maintain the frequency and efficiency ot‘ these services), and would have to 
fix their price accordingly. 

Mr. Holt, the predecessor of the West India and Pacific Steam Company, did, doubt¬ 
less, take these disadvantages into consideration when he tendered in 186J, and the 
result was that his offer was not on the whole as advantageous as that of the Royal 
Mail Company. 

19. If the services be now thrown open to competition once more, one of two things 
will happen, either the rivals of the Royal Mail Company will tender for the remune¬ 
rative portions only, in which case, as the unremunerative portion must be maintained, 
the department will assuredly have to fall back on the Royal Mail Company for the 
whole. Or the rivals of the Royal Mail Company will tender for the services as a 
whole, in which case, if the frequency and efficiency of the communications are to be 
maintained, they must be prepared to find means equal to those which the Royal Mail 
Company possess. 

20. If the examination of the accounts of the Royal Mail Company had led to the 
discovery that the subsidy will in ordinary years afford them an exorbitant dividend, 
there might be reason to hope that other Companies would sell us an equal service on 
lower terms, but as we know that with the present subsidy the Royal Mail Company 
could have earned nodhidendin 1858, 1859,1860, and 1861, that the high dividends of 
subsequent years were due to exceptional causes, which have ceased to exist, and that 
at present the income barely balances the expenditure, there is no room for any such 
hope. The presumption is in every way in favour of the Royal Mail Company. 

21. It is more reasonable to expect efficient service from those who have rendered it 
for 27 years, than from those who have not as yet had the opportunity of rendering 
any; and other things being equal, it is more reasonable to expect service at a low 
price from those who have the plant and organisation in full working order than from 
those by whom such plant and organisation have yet to be created. 

The withdrawal of the subsidy from the Royal Mail Company, if it did not altogether 
break up the Company, must entirely alter the character of their operations and lead 
almost immediately to a deterioration in the quality of their fleet. 

The grant of the subsidy to a rival Company might no doubt produce a consider¬ 
able change iu the operations and a proportionate rise in the quality of the fleet of 
that Company. 

It is no doub’ possible to effect such a transfer, but it is in the highest degree 
improbable that it would be accompanied by any such annual saving of cost as would 
compensate for the immediate displacement of capital and depreciation of property 
which it would involve. 

22. It, therefore, it be considered desirable to maintain the existing frequency and 
efficiency of the communication between this country and the West Indies, the Span¬ 
ish Main and the Brazils, 1 think that the request of the Royal Mail Company for an 
extension of their present Contracts might with advantage be granted. But I think 
it should be a condition of the concession that if their profits rise above a stipulated 
amount during the extended term, they shall share the excess with the Government. 

There can be no doubt that during the American war the Royal Mail Company de¬ 
rived a special advantage from their position as Contractors with the British Govern¬ 
ment; and if it be a sound proposition (as I think it is) that the subsidy for such serv¬ 
ices as theirs should be such as, taken together with the returns from ordinary traf- 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


219 


lie, will yield a moderate dividend, I think the converse of the proposition must also 
>e tine, and that Government should share in any exceptional advantages which the 
grant of a Contract may confer. 

I have retrained, however, from making any proposition to the Royal Mail Company 
on the subject, nor have I communicated to the directors the opinion which I have 
formed with regard to their application. 

23. there are two other questions in connection with the West India Mail Service 
v Inch present themselves, but do not press for consideration. 

I he first is as to the substitution of some other Island for St. Thomas as the point 
ot separation between the trunk and branch services. 

I believe the directors will be willing to entertain this question if a station which 
A' ill, on the whole, he superior to St. Thomas can he found. 

The other question is as to the proportion of cost to he borne by the West Indian 
Colonies. / 

I have not thought it necessary to enter upon this question at present, because I doubt 
whether we ha ve as yet correctly ascertained the principle upon which their share of 
the cost should he assessed, and more especially because I cannot imagine that the 
value to this country of efficient postal communication with the West Indies, &c. can, 
under any circumstances, be less than the difference between the postage and the cost 
of the service. 

24. Lastly, I may remark that although I have not alluded to the services of the 
I rench Company, I have not overlooked them. I have left them out of consideration, 
because as the public can now avail themselves of any facilities for communication 
which the vessels of the French Company afford, a reduction of the facilities which 
are afforded by the Royal Mail Company would not he met by the employment of the 
French Company. 

(Signed) F. J. SCUDAMORE. 

18 December 18(17. 


No. 4. 

The Secretary to the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company to the Secretary to tlic Treasury, 

Royai. Mail Steam Packet Company, 

55, Moorgate-street, 
London, E. C. 1 April 1868. 

Sir. With reference to the correspondence which took place in November last re¬ 
specting an extension of this Company’s contracts, 1 am desired by the court of direct¬ 
ors to ask your attention to the serious loss and inconvenience the Company is suffer¬ 
ing while a waiting the decision of Her Majesty’s Government. 

Yon will doubtless remember that in November last you stated, for the information 
of the court, that the Lords of the Treasury were disposed to entertain the proposi¬ 
tion of the directors, “That Her Majesty’s Government should grant the Company a 
live years’ extension of the present Contract.” You, at the same time, stated that an 
examination of the Company’s books would be made (in accordance with a proposi¬ 
tion emanating from the directors) in order to see whether any reduction should take 
place in the subsidy. It w r as also added that the Lords of the Treasury reserved for 
future consideration whether any other conditions should be imposed on the Company. 

Immediately upon the receipt of that letter the directors, knowing that the exami¬ 
nation would confirm the account given by them in their previous letter, expended 
above one hundred and thirty thousand pounds (130,000 l.) in the purchase of new 
ships, which expense, but for the hopes thus held out, they w'ould not have been 
justified in incurring. 

Subsequently to the incurring of these liabilities the directors learned that it w r as 
the wish of the Government that the Company should remove their head station from 
St. Thomas to another island, and they understand that communications on the sub¬ 
ject have been going on for some time past between the several departments of Gov- 
vernment concerned in such change. They have been, under these circumstances, re¬ 
luctant to press the Government to send to them the further communication which 
they have been expecting to receive from the Treasury ; and they have been anxious 
that the Government should only arrive at a conclusion as to the change of station, 
after careful consideration of all the circumstances. Whatever information on the 
subject the Company possess has been ami w r ill be at the disposal of the Treasury and 
Post Office. 

But more than four months have now elapsed since they were informed of their Lord- 
ships’willingness to extend their contract, and meanwhile the additional disasters at 
St. Thomas’ have occurred, adding greatly to the expense and inconvenience at which 
the service is carried on. But, in the absence bf definite knowledge of the views of 



220 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


the Government, they have heen unable to take any -steps to obviate this expense 
and inconvenience, for instance, in the reconstruction of their wharves and buildings. 

The Board would therefore earnestly urge on the Government now to complete the 
new contract, either (1) on the basis of the communications in November, with a clause 
providing for the removal hereafter of the station to some other island, or (2) with 

such new station named in it. , . 

In the latter event (2) the Board are prepared (as has been unofficially communicated 
to the Treasury), on being informed what station has been selected, to state with 
what modifications as to increase of subsidy, or as to additional length of contract, 
they could accept the present conditions as expressed in the communication of last 
November; if the former/l) coursewould be more convenient to Government, the 
Board are willing to agree that it should be left to arbitration to de ide, in the event 
of a new station being hereafter selected, what those modifications should be, and 
they would consent that it should be at the option of the Government either to pay 
the additional subsidy awarded by the arbitrator, or to give the corresponding ex¬ 
tension of the contract which he might decide to be fair. 

As the yearly meeting of the shareholders will take place in the course ot this month, 
it is of great importance that the directors should be in a condition to give some pre¬ 
cise information as to the negotiations with the Government, and that the Contract 
should be settled. 

I have, &.c. 

(signed.) .1. M. LLOYD, Secretary. 

The Secretary of the Treasury, 

Whitehall. 


No. 5. 

Copy of Treasury Minute , dated 9th April 18(58. 

Acknowledge, and say that my Lords regret the delay, but are awaiting the result 
of an inquiry which is being made by the Admiralty into the question of the progosed 
substitution of some other station for that of St. Thomas. 


No. 6. 

Copy of 'Treasury Minute, dated 1st May 1868. 

Write to the Postmaster General that my Lords have had before them his letter of 
the 26th December last, enclosing the report of Mr. Scudamore, one of the Assistant 
Secretaries to the Post Office, of his examination of the books of the Royal Mail Steam 
Packet Company, with reference to the application made by the Company for an ex¬ 
tension of the Con tracts they hold for the con veyance of the Brazils and River Plate and 
West Indian mails. 

State that my Lords, having given their attentive consideration to the very able 
and comprehensive report of Mr. Scudamore, have come to the conclusion that, advert¬ 
ing not ouly to the opinion expressed by that gentleman, in which they fully concur, 
but also to the very serious losses which the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company have 
lately sustained, owing to the recent hurricane in the West Indies, and likewise to 
the difficulty which (as it appears) the Company would experience in providing satis¬ 
factorily for the service during the short period their present Contracts have to run, 
they are warranted in entertaining favourably the application of the Company for 
an extension of the two Contracts they hold to the end of the year 1872, and thence¬ 
forward to be at two years’ notice, subject, however, to the following conditions, 
viz.: 

1. That in the event of the Company in any year earning sufficient to pay a dividend 
exceeding eight per cent, per annum, a moiety of such excess should be allowed to 
Her Majesty’s Government in diminution of the subsidies payable for that year; and. 

2. That, adverting to the unhealthiness of St. Thomas, the present central packet 
station in the West Indies, the Company will, on receiving reasonable notice, remove 
the central packet station from St. Thomas to any other port in the West Indies which 
may be considered by Her Majesty’s Government suitable for the purpose. 

State, in conclusion, that my Lords request that the Postmaster General will com¬ 
municate to the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company the decisiou at which they have 
arrived with reference to the application of the Company for an extension of their 
Contracts. 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


221 


No. 7. 


The Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 


General Post Office, P3 May 1868. 

My Lords: On receipt of your letter of the 2nd instant, I communicated to the 
Directors of the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company the decision arrived at by your 
Lordships to grant, conditionally, an extension of their Contracts to the end of the 
year 1872, subject thenceforward to a two years’ notice of termination, and I have re¬ 
ceived from them a reply, a copy of which I enclose. 

The Directors accept t lie extension with its attendant conditions, with two provisoes; 
in the first of which they attempt to limit the earnings divisible with the Government 
to the traffic receipts and the subsidy, whereas I apprehend that your Lordships intended 
to follow the course adopted in the case of a similar understanding with the Penin¬ 
sular and Oriental Company, which was that the Company should pay to the Govern¬ 
ment a portion of the excess accruing from ail sources whatever , and which, but for 
such stipulation, would be applicable to the payment of dividends; and I presume 
that you will not consent to the limitation proposed by the Royal Mail Company. 

The second proviso of the Company appears to me to be perfectly fair and reason¬ 
able. It is, that, if at any time during the continuance of the Contract the Company 
be required to move their central packet station to some other station in the West 
Indies, no additional subsidy will be payable by Her Majesty’s Government, but that, 
if such removal should be found to involve the Company in additional outlay on their 
■capital account, the Company should be allowed such a further extension of their 
Contract as, in the opinion of an impartial arbitrator, w ill enable them to recoup 
themselves for that outlay; and I beg to recommend that this proviso should receive 
your Lordships’ sanction. 

I have, Ac. 


(signed.) MONTROSE. 

The Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury. 


[Enclosure in No. 7.] 

Royal Mail Steam Packet Company, 

55, Moorgate Street, London, 6 May 1868. 

Sir : I am desired to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 5th instant (No. 
38,525), intimating that the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury have informed the 
Postmaster General that they concede an extension of the Company’s Contract to the 
end of 1872, and to be thenceforward at two years’ noti e; but that tlieir Lordships 
desire that the conditions stated in your letter, as to dividend and removal from 
St. Thomas, may be attached to the concession in question. 

I am desired by the court of directors to state, in reply, that they accept the two 
conditions, on the following understanding: 

1. That if in any year, after making deductions according to the present rates for 
depreciation, repairs, and insurance, the traffic receipts and subsidy of the company 
should exceed the working expenses by more than eight per cent, on the paid-up cap¬ 
ital ( e . q. by more than 72,000 l. on the present capital of 900,000 l.), one moiety of 
such excess be credited to Her Majesty’s Government. 

2. That if at any time during the continuance of the Contract the Company be re¬ 
quired to move their central packet station to some other station in the West Indies, 
no additional subsidy will be payable by Her Majesty’s Government; but that if such 
removal should be found to involve the Company in additional outlay on their capital 
account, the Company should be allowed such a further extension of their contract 
as, in the opinion of an impartial arbitrator, will enable them to recoup themselves 
for that outlay. The Postmaster General will see that, without some modification of 
this kind, it would be in the power of Her Majesty’s Government seriously to injure 
this Company bv requiring them to move to, tor instance, a barren island, w r here ex¬ 
tensive wharves and buildings would have to be erected for, perhaps, only a short 
remaining period of contract. 

The court would also point out to the Postmaster General the great importance to 
the public and the Company of an early decision as to that removal. Since the dis¬ 
asters at St. Thomas, the French Company are restoring their wharves at that port, 
and are arranging to carry on the service as.formerly ; whereas this Company, in con¬ 
sequence of the intimation given to Parliament that the centra? station will bo re¬ 
moved to another island, are carrying on the service at the greatest inconvenience 
and expense, from the state of their wharves and buildings. 



222 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


It will be obviously unreasonable that the Company should be compelled now to 
restore their works at St. Thomas, and to remove elsewhere during the currency ot 
the Contract. 

I have, &c. 

(Signed) J. M. LLOYD, Secretary. 


The Secretary of the Post Office. 


No. 8. 

Copy of Treasury Minute, dated 5th June 18(58. 


Write to the Postmaster General that my Lords have had before them his Grace’s let¬ 
ter of the 151th ultimo, representing that thp Directors of the Royal Mail Steam Packet 
Company accept the extension of their Contracts to the end of the year 1872, with the 
attendant conditions, with two provisoes, in the first of which the directors propose 
to limit the earnings divisible with the Government to the traffic receipts and the sub¬ 
sidy, whereas my Lords in their first condition intended to follow the course adopted 
in the case of a similar understanding with the Peninsular and Oriental Company, 
which w as that the Company should pay to the Government a proportion of the ex¬ 
cess accruing from alt sources whatsoever, and which, but for such stipulation, would 
be applicable to the payment of dividends. 

Request the Duke of Montrose to inform the directors of t he Royal Mail Company, 
that my Lords consent to the proposed limitation, provided always that the sum set 
apart annually for insurance be not greater than that which would be paid to an in¬ 
surance office ; and provided that the interest accruing from the reserved fund, exclu¬ 
sive of the interest on existing accumulations, be included in the profits in which the 
Government is to participate. 

It will be necessary to provide for these points in the Contract. 

The second proviso of the directors appears to their Lordships to be fair and reason¬ 
able, and they are prepared to sanction it, viz., that if at any time during the contin¬ 
uance of the Contract the Company be required to move their central packet station 
to some other station in the West Indies, no additional subsidy w ill be payable by 
Her Majesty’s Government; but that if such removal should be found to involve the 
Company in additional outlay on their capital account, the Company shall be allowed 
such a further extension of their Contract as, in the opinion of an impartial arbitra¬ 
tor, will afford them a fair compensation for that outlay. 


No. 9. 

The Secretary to the Post Office to the Secretary to the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company . 

General Post Office, 8 June 1868. 

Sir : The Postmaster General has had under consideration your letter of the 6tli 
ultimo, in which you state that the Directors of the Royal Mail Steam Packet Com¬ 
pany accept the extension of their Contracts to the end of the year 1872, with the 
attendant conditions laid down by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treas¬ 
ury, with two provisoes, in the first of which the directors propose to limit "the earn¬ 
ings divisible with the Governmentto the trafficreceipts and thesubsidy, whereas the Lords 
of the Treasury, in their first condition, intended to follow the course adopted in the 
case of a similar understanding with the Peninsular and Oriental Company, which 
was that the Company should pay to the Government a proportion of the excess ac¬ 
cruing/row all sources whatsoever, and which, but for such stipulation, would be ap¬ 
plicable to the payment of dividends. 

The Duke of Moutrose having communicated further with the Treasury on this 
point, has received their Lordships’ directions to inform the Directors of the Royal 
Mail Company, that they consent to the proposed limitation, provided always that 
the sum set apart annually for insurance be not greater than that which -would 
be paid to an insurance office; and provided that the interest accruing from the re¬ 
served fund, exclusive of the interest on existing accumulations, be included in the 
profits in which the Government is to participate. 

It will be necessary to provide for these points in the Contract. 

The second proviso of the directors appears to their Lordships to be fair and reason¬ 
able, and they are prepared to sanction it, viz., that if at any time during the con¬ 
tinuance of the Contract the Company be required to move their central packet sta- 




AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


223 


tion to some othev station in the West Indies, no additional subsidy will be payable 
by Her Majesty’s Government, but that if such removal should be found to involve 
the Company, in additional outlay on their capital account, the Company shall be 
allowed such a further extension of their Contract as, in the opinion of an impartial 
arbitrator, will afford them a fair compensation for that outlay. 

I am, &e. ' N 

(Signed) JOHN TILLEY. 

J. M. Lloyd, Esq. 


No. 10. 

The Postmaster General tr the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 


General Post Office, *24 June 1868. 

My Lords: In accordance with the directions contained in your letter of the 6th 
instant, I have caused a draft Contract to be prepared by the solicitor of this depart¬ 
ment for giving effect to the decision of your Lordships as to extending to the end 
of the year 1872, on certain conditions, the duration of the existing Contracts with 
the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company for the West India and Brazil services; and 
I enclose such draft Contract for approval. 

With reference to the sum to be set apart annually for insurance, I transmit, for 
your Lordships’ information, a copy of the correspondence which has taken place 
between this department and the Company on this subject, and as they find it diffi¬ 
cult to name a sum on which the amount of insurance should be calculated, the only 
course open appears to be to provide in the Contract that the Company shall set 
apart annually, under the head of “Insurance,” a sum not exceeding 45,000/. This 
is the amount hitherto set apart under that head, and it is obviously less than would 
be paid by the Company to an insurance office for the insurance of their ships at 
eight guineas per cent., whether estimated on the paid-up capital of the Company, 
or on the assumed value of their ships appearing in the Company’s books. The 
draft Contract makes provision accordingly. 

I have, &c. 

(Signed) MONTROSE. 

The Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury. 


[Enclosure No. 1 in No. 10.] 


Royal Mail Steam Packet Company, 

55, Moorgate-street, London, 17 June 1868. 


Sir : With reference to that portion of your letter of the 8tli instant, on the subject 
of the insurance of the Company’s fleet, I am desired to transmit to you herewith copy 
of a letter from the Marine Insurance Company, dated 15th instant, showing the rate 
at which that Company and the Indemnity would undertake the risk; and I am to add 
that, as regards the value on which the rate in question should lie calculated, it is pro¬ 
posed to have that point settled between the Post Office and the Company hereafter. 

I have, tfec. 

(Signed) J. M. LLOYD, 

Secretary. 


The Secretary of the Post Office. 


[Enclosure No. 2.] 

The Marine Insurance Office, 

London, 15 June 1868. 

Gentlemen: Referring to a personal conference with Mr. Marshall, ot your Com¬ 
pany, I beg to inform you that the Indemnity and this Company are prepared to grant 
you policies of insurance for 12 months, say from 1st proximo, at eight guineas per cent., 
such policies to cover all risks commonly included in policies of insurance, plus the 
risk of capture. And said quotation is made in respect of hull and machinery of each 
and every of your steamers, whether engaged in the West Indian or Brazil route, and 
to include also the smaller vessels supplementing your great routes. 





224 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


The 1st proximo is stated as the day of commencement, because the risk from cap¬ 
ture might become so enhanced from political events that a much higher premium 
might be demanded, and the companies would not feel disposed to bind themselves to 
a uniform rate for more than a year. 

I remain, &c. 

(Signed) ROBERT J. LODGE, 

Secretary. 

The Directors of the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company. 


's 


[Enclosure No. 3.] 


General Post Office, 1 8 June 1868. 


Sir : Having submitted to the Postmaster General our letter of the 17th instant, 
I am directed by his Grace to request that you will state to the Directors of the Royal 
Mail Steam Packet Company, that, inasmuch as eight guineas per cent., calculated 
either on the paid-up capital of the Company, or on the assumed value of their ships 
appearing in the Company’s books, would amount to considerably more than 45,000 l., 
the sum hitherto set apart annually bY the Company under the head of “ Insurance; ” 
although this sum of 45,000 l. has left a good margin for profit, his Grace considers 
that it will be necessary to settle at once the amount on which the insurance is to be 
calculated, and to specify such amount in the Contract. 

I am, &c. 

(Signed) JOHN TILLEY. 


J. M. Lloyd, Esq. 


[Enclosure No. 4.] 

Royal Mail Steam Packet Company, 

5.5, Aloorgate-street, 19 June 1868. 

Sir: I am desired to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 18tli instant, in 
which you remark that the rate at which the Company’s fleet could be insured, cal¬ 
culated either on the paid-up capital of the Company, or on the assumed value of their 
ships appearing in the Company’s books, would amount to considerably more than 
45,000 I., the sum hitherto set apart annually by the Company under the head of 
“Insurance,” and state that the Postmaster General therefore considers that it will 
be necessary to settle at once the amount on which the insurance is to be calculated. 

In reply, I am to observe that the value of the Company’s fleet fluctuates consid¬ 
erably, and therefore, if his Grace desires to have something definite inserted in the 
Contract, the directors propose that, in view of the statement contained in your letter 
now under reply, the sum of 45,000 1. per annum be adopted as the amount which the 
Company should continue to set apart under the head of “ insurance.” 

Iu your letter of the 8th instant (No. 416 T.) allusion was made to the understand¬ 
ing come to by the Government with the Peninsular and Oriental Company, in refer¬ 
ence to which it will not lie out of place here to remark, that there is a material dif¬ 
ference between the terms of the remuneration of the two Companies, inasmuch as the 
Peninsular and Oriental Company is guaranteed a large increase of subsidy, when 
requisite, towards making up a minimum dividend, while to this Company no such 
guarantee is given. 

I have &c. 

(Signed) J. M. LLOYD, 

Secretary. 


No. 11. 

Copy of the Treasury Minute, dated 26tli June 1868. 

Return the draft Contract submitted herein, stating that my Lords are pleased to 
approve thereof, including the clause inserted therein permitting the Company “to 
include in their working expenses any sum not exceeding the sum of 45,000 1. (whether 
the same shall be actually paid or merely set apart as an insurance fund) in respect 
of the insurance” of their “ships.” 





AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


225 


No. 12. 


The Postmaster General to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. 


General Post Office, 27 June 1867. 

My L OHDS : I have the honor to transmit to yonr Lordships, to belaid on the Table 
of the House of Commons for approval, a copy of the Contract which I concluded on 
the 26tli instant with the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company, extending their Con¬ 
tract for the conveyance of the West India and Brazil Maiis, under the authority 
given to me in your Lordships’ letter of the 6th instant. 

I have, &c. 


(Signed) MONTROSE. 

The Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury. 


(Indorsed:) West India and Brazil Mails. Copies of a Contract, dated 26 June 1868, 
entered into between the Postmaster General and the Royal Mail Steam Packet Com¬ 
pany, extending their Contracts for the Conveyance of the West India and Brazil 
Mails for a further Period; and, of Correspondence relating thereto. (Mr. Sclater- 
Booth.) Ordered, by The House of Commons, to be printed, 29 June 1868. 


THE LA IV OF FRANCE UPON SHIPPING. 

(It will be noticed that France for sixteen years prior to the passage of this act had 
tried the policy of “ Free ships” and “ Free raw material,” and found the policy to be 
a failure, although her labor is cheaper than ours.—J. R.) 

Commercial. No. 8 (1881). (France.) Further Correspondence with Her 
Majesty’s Embassy at Paris relative to the French Mercantile Marine 
Bill. Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her 
Majesty. 1881. 


[Translation.] 

. The Senate and the Chamber of Deputies have adopted, 

The President of the Republic promulgates, the Law of which the text follows: 
Article 1. The right of free pilotage is granted to all sailing-vessels not measuring 
over 80 tons, and to steamers whose measurement does not exceed 100 tons, whenever 
they run regularly between port and port, and habitually frequent the entrances to 
rivers. • 

Nevertheless, at the request of the Chambers ot Commerce, and after an inquiry in 
the usual form has been made, public administrative regulations shall determine the 
modifications of the existing rules which maybe considered necessary in the interest 
of navigation. 

Art. 2. For foreign-going vessels the visit of inspect ion prescribed by Article 225 of 
the Commercial Code for a fresh cargo loaded in France shall not be obligatory unless 
more than six months have elapsed since the last inspection, unless the vessels shall 

have sustained damage. . ,, _ . 

4rt 3 For the official documents or proees-verhaux showing the changes ot owners 
of the ship, either “total or partial, a fixed charge shall he made for registration 
of 3 fr. Article 5, No. 2, of the Law of the 28th February, 1872, is repealed so far as it 
is contrary to the present provision. 

Art. 4. To compensate ship-builders for the charges fixed by the Custom-house 
Tariff the following allowances shall be made to them: 

For iron or steel vessels, 60 fr. per ton gross measurement. 

For wooden vessels of 200 tons or more, 20 fr. 

For wooden vessels ot less than 200 tons, 10 lr. 

For composite vessels, 40 fr. 

For en«'ines placed on board steamers, and for auxiliary apparatus, such as steam- 
pumps, donkey-engines, winches, ventilators worked by machinery, also their boilers 

and pipes, 12 fr. per 100 kilog. . 

Ships planked with timber, having beams and ribs of iron or steel, are to be con¬ 
sidered as composite vessels. . . , , . , , 

Art 5 Every change in a ship by which an increase in measurement is gained shall 

give right to a bounty, based on the above tariff, according to the ic crease of tonnage 

g! The bounty shall be granted for driving-engines and auxiliary apparatus placed on 
board after coni plot ion ot the ship. 


007 - 15 



226 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


On change of boilers, the owner shall be allowed a compensation allowance of 8 fr. 
per 100 kilog. on new boilers, weighed without the tubes, if of French make. 

Art. 6. The allowances granted by Articles 4 and 5 shall be paid, on delivery of the 
French register, by the Receiver of Customs at the nearest place of construction. 

Art. 7. The system of admission duty free, fixed by Article 1 of the Law of the 19th 
May, 18GG, and by Article 2 of the Law of the 17th March, 1879, is abolished. 

Art. 8. Ship-builders shall receive allowances for vessels on the stocks at the time 
when the present law shall come into force, as stipulated in Article 4, after deducting 
the amount of Customs dues fixed by the Conventional Tariff on foreign imports 
which may have been entered free of duty for ship-building purposes. 

Art. 9. As compensation for charges imposed on the mercantile na vy for the recruit¬ 
ment and service of the military navy, a navigation bounty shall be granted, during 
ten years from the date of publication of this Law, to all French vessels, sailing or 
steam. 

This bounty is applicable only to foreign-going vessels. 

It is tixed at 1 fr. 50 c. per register ton and per 1000 miles’ run for vessels of French 
construction fresh off' the stocks, and decreases annually by— 

0.075 fr. for wooden vessels ; 

0.075 fr. for composite vessels; 

0.05 fr. for iron vessels. 

For foreign-built vessels the bounty is reduced to one half of the above assigned 
amount. 

Vessels taking out French Registers before the promulgation of the present Law 
are assimilated for bounty purposes to vessels of French construction. 

The bounty is increased by 15 per cent, for steamers built according to plans previ¬ 
ously approved of by the Marine Department. 

The number of miles run is calculated according to the distance from the point of 
departure to the point of arrival, measured on a direct maritime line. 

- In case of war, merchant-ships can be requisitioned by the State. 

Vessels engaged in the foreign and home fisheries (“la grande et. la petitepeche”), 
those belonging to subsidized lines, and vachts, are excepted from receiving the 
bounty ✓ 

Art. 10. Every master of a vessel receiving one of the bounties fixed by Article 9 
of the present Law shall be obliged to carry, free of charge, mails put under his 
charge by the Post Office authorities, or to be delivered to that Administration, as 
prescribed in the Consular Decree of the 19th Germinal, year X. 

If a Post Office agent is deputed to accompany the despatches, he shall also be con- 
veyed free of charge. 

Art. 11. A regulation of public administration, containing a special statement of 
the distances between ports, shall fix the system on which this Law shall be applied. 

The present Law, discussed and adopted by the Senate and by the Chamber of 
Deputies, shall be carried out as a State Law. 

Done at Paris, January 29, 1881. 


By the President of the Republic: 

The Minister of Agriculture and Commerce, 
(Signed) P. Tirard. 

The Minister of Marine and Colonies, 
(Signed) G. Cloue. 

The Minister of Finance, 

(Signed) J. Magnin. 


(Signed) JULES GREVY. 


« 


SYNOPSIS OF POST OFFICE MAIL CONTRACTS BETWEEN THE GOVERN¬ 
MENT OF GREAT BRITAIN AND VARIOUS STEAMSHIP LINES FOR CAR¬ 
RYING THE BRITISH MAIL. 


Mail contract Atlantic Itoi/cil ATctil Stccun Isaviyatioii ('ompauy. 

Dated 15tli of July, 1861k 

Run between Galway and America. 

Term ol contract shall commence August, 1863, and continue in force until the 26tli 
of June, 1867. 

Signed by Rt. Hon. Edward John Lord Stanley, Postmaster-General 
Payment to the company, £1,500 ($7,500 for each trip), for each entire voyage 
Postmaster-General has power to purchase or charter all or any vessel 1 ° 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


227 


Mail contract—Joseph George Churchnard. 

Dated 26th clay of April, 1859. 

Run between Dover and Calais, in France, to Ostend, in Belgium. 

Term of contract shall commence 26th day of April, 1859, and shall continue in force 
until the 26th day of April, 1870, and then determine at the expiration of a 12 months’ 
ndtice given by either party. 

Signed by Antonio Brady, Admiralty. 

Payment to the company of a sum at the rate £18,000 ($90,000) per year. 

Mail contract — Won. Inman. 

Dated 9th day of March, 1869 (see 1st page). 

Run between Liverpool and New York. 

Term of contract shall commence 1st day of May, 1869, and continue in force until 
the expiration of twelve mouths’ notice given on or after 31st of December, 1876 (see 
page 4). 

Signed by Rt. lion. Spencer Compton Cavendish, Postmaster- General. 

Payment to the company of a subsidy of £35,000 ($175,000) per annum (see page 3), 

Admiralty has power to purchase or charter all or any vessel ( see page 5). 

Mail contracts—Joseph George Churchnard. 

Date, 1st day of April, 1854. 

Run between Dover, Calais, in France, and Ostend, in Belgium. 

Term of contract shall commence on 1st day of April, 1854, and continue in force 
until 1st of October, 1858, and determine on twelve months’ notice by either party. 

Payment to the company of £15,500 ($77,500) per annum. 

New mail contract—Joseph George Churchnard. 

Date, 20th day of June, 1855. 

Run between Dover, Calais, in France, and Ostend, in Belgium. 

Term of contract shall commence 20th of June, 1855, and continue in force until 
the 20th of June, 1863, and shall tlieu determine on a twelve months’ notice given on 
or after 20th June, 1862, by either party. 

Payment to the company of a sum £15,500 ($77,500) per annum. 

Contract bearing date of April 1, 1854 (above) is hereby annulled. 

Contract — Royal Mail Steam-Racket Company. 

Date, 24tli December, 1874. 

Run between Southampton and Brazil and Rive? Plate, twice a month. 

Term of contract shall commence 1st day of January, 1875, aud shall continue in 
force until the Postmaster-General shall, by writing under his hand, give to the com¬ 
pany, or the company give the Postmaster-General, six months’ notice in writing. 

Sigued by John James Robert Manners, Postmaster-General. 

Payment to the company, Is. 3d (32 cts.) an ounce for letters, 3d a pound for news¬ 
papers, aud 5 d a pound lor book packets and patterns. 

Contract—Royal Mail Steam-Racket Company. 


Dated 5th of May, 1874. 

Run between Southampton and West Indies. 

Term of contract shall commence 1st day January, 1875, and continue in force till 
twenty-lbur months’ notice given on or alter 1st day January, 1878. 

Signed by John James Robert Manners, Postmaster-General. 

Payment to the company a subsidy or sum £84,750 ($433,750) per annum. 

Extra subsidy of £2,000\$10,000) per annum for stopping at Plymouth. 

, Contract—Royal Mail Steam-Racket Company. 


Dated 12th August, 1878. 

Run between Southampton aud West Indies (see page 2). 

Term of contract shall commence 1st day January, 1880, and (ontmue in force 








228 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


until the expiration of a twenty-four months’ notice given on or after 1st (lay of Jan¬ 
uary, 1883, by either party. 

Signed by Rt Hon. John James Robert Manners, Postmaster-General. 

Payment to the company of a subsidy of £80,0U0 ^$400,000) per annum. (See 
page 6.) 

An extra subsidy of £500 for stopping at Monsterrat. 

Contract—lloyal Mail Steam-Packet Company. 

Dated 31st August, 1871. 

Run between St. Thomas and Puerto Rico. 

Term of contract shall commence 1st day of '"January, 1871, and shall continue in 
force so long as a certain agreement, dated the 22d July, 1863, and expressed, to be 
made between Her Majesty’s then Postmaster-General and the company, shall continue 
in force. 

Signed by William Monsell. Postmaster-General. 

Subsidy to company of £1,000 ($5,000) per annum. 

Contract—West India and Pacific Steamship Company .. 

Dated 24th day of September, I860. 

Run between Liverpool andPort-au-Prince, Vera Cruz, Tampico, 'La Guayra, Puerto 
Cabello, and Santa Martha once a month. 

Term of contract shall commence 20th day of October, 1869, and continue in force 
until the expiration of a written notice given at any time, either by the company or 
by the Postmaster-General, of not less than six months. 

Signed by Spencer Compton Cavendish, Postmaster-General. 

Payment to the company of £2 6 d. for every ounce of letters, and 3d. for every pound 
of papers, and 5 d. tor every pound of book packets or patterns; American currency, 
60 cents per ounce, or 2 shillings, and 6 per letter. 

Contract—London, Belgium, Brazil, and River Plate S. S. Company, and with the Pacific 

Steam Navigation Company. 

Date, 9th of July, 1869. 

Run between Falmouth and Brazil. 

Term of contract shall commence 3d day of August, 1869, aud shall continue in force 
one year. 

Signed by Spencer Compton Cavendish, Postmaster-General. 

Payment to the company, 2s. 6d. (60 cents ounce; for every ounce of letters, 3d. for 
every pound of newspapers, and 5 d. for every pound of book packets or patterns. 

The above compensation was two times more than our government paid the late 
Brazil line. 


Mail contract, 1 eninsula and Oriental Steam Navigation- Company. 

Dated 17th day of November, 1865. 

Run between Point de Galle and Sydney, New South Wales. 

Term of contract shall commence *lst February, 1866, and continue in force until 
either of said parties shall give a twenty-four months’ notice of their desire to deter¬ 
mine. 

Signed by Edward John Lord Stanley, Postmaster-General. 

Payment to company of a subsidy £120,000 ($600,000) per annum, one voyage each 
way. ® 

Payment to company of a subsidy £130,000 ($650,000) per annum, one voyage each 
way in every lunar month. . J ® 

Payment to company of a subsidy £170,000 ($850,000) per annum, two voyages each 
way in every lunar mouth. J ® 

Payment to company of a subsidy £184,00l)«($920,000) per annum, two voyages each 
way m every lunar month. ’ 0 h 

Admiralty may purchase or charter all or any of vessels. 


Mail contracts —Pacific Steam Navigation Company. 

Dated 26th day of July, 1864. 

Run between Panama and Valparaiso. 

Term of contract shall commence April 1, 1805, and shall continne'iu force for seven 

Signed by Edward John Lord Stanley, Postmaster-General 
Payment to the Company of a sum of £18,250 per annum 
Admiralty has power to purchase or charter all or any of vessels 


229 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Contract—Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company. 

Dated 1st January, 1853. (See page 1.) 

Run between England and India, Ceylon, Mauritius, China, and Australia. 

Term of contract shall commence 1st January, 1853, for eight years, and then deter¬ 
mine it twelve months’ notice have been given. (See page 10.) 

Signed by Lord High Admiralty (on behalf of her Majesty). 

Payment to Company of a sum of £199,000 f$998,000) per annum. (See page 9.) 
Admiralty have power to purchase or charter all or any of vessels. (See page 9.) 


Contract—Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company. 

Dated 7th day of February, 1879. 

Run between England and India and China. 

Term of contract shall commence on the 1st day of February, 1880, and shall con¬ 
tinue in force until the 31st day of January, 1888, and even longer if not annulled by 
writing from either party. 

Signed by John James Robert Manners, Postmaster-General. 

Subsidy to company of £370,000 ($1,850,000) per annum. 

Admiralty has power to purchase or charter all or any of the vessels. 

Thj subsidy being paid at date of this contract (7th February, 1879), is £50,000 
more than subsidy for new contract to run to 1888. 

Contract — Liverpool , Brazil , and River Plate Steam Navigation Company. 

Date, 3d day of June, 1870. 

Run between Liverpool and Brazil and River Plate. 

Term of contract shall commence on the 1st day of June, 1870, and shall continue 
in force until the expiration of a written notice to be given by either party to the 
other of them of not less than six months. 

Signed by Spencer Compton Cavendish, Postmaster-General. 

Payment to the company 2 s. 0 d. (American money 60 cents) for every ounce of 
letters, 3 d. for every pound of newspapers, and 5 d. for every pound of book-packets 
or packets of trade pattern conveyed by them. 

Mail contracts—Edward Canard. 

Dated lltli day of December, 1868. 

Run between Liverpool and New York and Boston. 

Term of contract shall commence 1st day January, 1869, and continue in force until 
31st December, 1876. (See page 4.) 

Signed by most noble James, Duke of Montrose, Postmaster-General. 

Payment to company a subsidy of £70,000 ($350,000) per annum. 

Admiralty has power to purchase or charter all or any of vessels. (See page 4.) 


Mail contract—William Inman. 

Dated l*2tli December, 1868. 

Run between Liverpool, via Queenstown, to New York. 

Term of contract shall commence 1st day January, 1869, and continue in force until 
31st day of December, 1876, or longer. 

Payment to company a subsidy of £35,000 ($175,000) per annum. 

Admiralty may purchase or charter all or any of vessels. (See page 10.) 

Mail contract—North German Lloyd, of Bremen. (See page 12.) 

Dated 3d December, 1868. 

Run between Southampton and New York. . 

Term of contract shall commence 1st day January, 1869, and continue in force until 
expiration of six months’ notice by either party. 

Signed by most noble James, Duke ot Montrose. 

Payment to company a subsidy in the following sums: Is. for every ounce ot let¬ 
ters, 3d. for every pound of newspapers, and 5 d. for every pound ot book packets and 
patterns. 

(American money, 25 cents an ounce ) 


230 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS, 


Noth by John Roach. 


All the bounty spoken of in the French law to aid in the construction of ships in 
America may be left out, or at least if any bounty is given it should be upon material 
produced at home, and should not be more than one fourth of the duty charged by 
law upon the same merchandise if imported. This would keep the money at borne 
and give employment to our own people. If the material for ship-building be pur¬ 
chased abroad the manufactured condition in which it would be imported—that is, 
in shapes—represents about half the co>t>, or labor, requisite for the completion of 
the irou hull of the ship. 

This law is virtually almost prohibitory, for it gives no bounty on the building of 
ships abroad and but one-half the bounty for running foreign-built ships; while men 
here are talking of bringing in the foreign built ship free, and on equal terms. 
Special notice is called to the repeal of the free material law, after twenty years’ trial. 
(Article 7), and to Article 9. 

The Italian commission recommended a similar law for Italy. 


The committee then (at 3.30 p. m.) adjourned until to-morrow morning. 


Fifth Avenue Hotel, New York City, November 21, 1882. 

The committee met at 10.30 a. m. Present, the Chairman (Mr. Conger), Senators 
Miller and Vest, and Representatives Candler and Dingley. 


Dr. William F. Thoms, of New York, president of the Seamen’s Aid and Protective 
Association, addressed the committee. 

He said: *‘I desiie the abolishment of the consular fee and advanced wages systems. 
The latter is the means whereby the sailor is robbed by the land-sharks and seamen 
are kept in slavery. Abolish the advance system, and you make the sailor a free 
man. Let them make arrangements with t he ship-owner direct. They are now com¬ 
pelled to go to the land-sharks by act of Congress. They cannot do otherwise. The 
theory advanced by Congress is good, but the practice is that the sailor and ship¬ 
owner could not come together and make agreements without the aid of these land- 
sharks. They have to depend on the latter to advance the ‘ blood money.’ It is im¬ 
possible for the captain to obtain good men under these circumstances. The men are 
often placed on board of the vessel drunk.” 

The Chairman. How can that be, when the law compels them to be' sober when 
signing the shipping papers ? 

Dr. Thoms. They are in possession of the land-sharks. 

The Chairman. Is there anything to prevent the sailor going on board to ship ? 

Dr. Thoms. Theoretically, nothing; but practically there is. 

The Chairman. How has Congress legislated to get them on board drunk ? 

Dr. Thoms. Because they have adopted this advance system and have compelled 
them to carry it out. 

The Chairman. Is there anything in the law that authorizes any payment in ad¬ 
vance ? 

Dr. Thoms. No, sir; it is against the law theoretically, but practically they have 
prevented captains, ship-owners, and seamen from coming together and from making 
mutual agreements. 

the Chairman. Congress has provided that they shall go before the shipping com¬ 
mission. • ' 

Dr. 1 Homs. Because they adopted the advance system and have compelled them 
to carry it out. 


The Chairman. Is there anything in the law that authorizes any payment in ad¬ 
vance ? 


Dr. 1 homs. It is against the law theoretically, but practically they have prevented 
captains, ship-owners, and men from coming together and agreeing’with each other. 

The Chairman. They have provided that they shall come together at the shipping 
commissioner’s office. & 

Hi. Tiioms. But by the advance system ot wages they are under the control of the 
land-sharks. 


The Chairman. Suppose advance wages were abolished, what is there to hinder 
the land-sharks from obtaining blood money just as they do now ? 

Dr. Thoms. There would be nothing to hinder it. 

The Chairman. If the advance wages were taken away, would not these men de¬ 
mand blood money ! Then the captain could make arrangements with his men. 

Dr. Thoms. There is more blood money paid now than ever. 

The Chairman. The testimony dons not bear this out. The evidence shows that 
there was more blood money before this advance than there has been since I do not 
agree with you. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 231 


Hr. I homs. T ciiu bring hundreds of sailors here who can testify to the truth of 
what I say. 

Mr. Miller. W hy don’t they come here and make it known? 

Dr. 1 homs. Because they can’t. They are kept away. I represent fifty thousand 
sailors I was shot at while in the precincts of these sailor landlords, and my life was 
in danger. I am suffering from it now. 

Mr. Cox. \on represent fifty thousand sailors; what association is that? 

Dr. 1 homs. File Seamen’s Aid and Protective Association, organized about thirty 
years ago. 


Mr. Cox. What are your grievances ? 

Dr. 1 homs. They are difficulties at home. We mean to remedy them. In the first 
place, no sailor can obtain a situation on board of a vessel without having to pay 
from $5 to $lo for the opportunity. This brought about the advance system of wages. 
Nearly $1,000,000 is paid in the United States commissioner’s office by this advance 
system. The blood money is obtained from the sailor. 

Mr. Cox. You say this is done by act of Congress? 

Dr. Thoms. \es, sir. Section li of the shipping commissioner’s act says: “If any 
person shall demand or receive, either directly or indirectly, from any seaman or 
other person seeking employment as a seaman, or from any person on his behalf, any 
remuneration whatever, other than the fees hereby authorized for providing him with 
employment, he shall, for every such offense, be liable to a penalty of not more than 
one hundred dollars.” 


The Chairman. The fees authorized here are not the fees you speak of. Let us 
keep to the law. You talk to the committee as if the laws of the United States en¬ 
couraged either advance money or blood money. Now explain how it is under that 
law. 


Dr. Thoms. That is the law theoretically, but practically no sailor can get a situ¬ 
ation. 

Mr. Miller. Why don’t you prosecute these men? 

Dr. Thoms Because it is impossible to get the authorities to take it up and bring 
it to the attention of the district attorney. The district attorney has refused to take 
it up. 

Mr. Miller. Can you present to the committee any cases where he has refused? 

Mr. Dingley. We want specific instances where the case was laid before him and 
he refused to prosecute it. 

Dr. Thoms, (reading). Section 17 of the shipping commissioner’s act provides, “No 
advance of wages shall be made or advance security given to any person but to the 
seaman himself or to his wife or mother; and no advance of wages shall be made or 
advance security given, unless the agreement contains a stipulation for the same, and 
an Accurate statement of the amount thereof; and no advance wages or advance se¬ 
curity shall be given to any seaman except in the presence of the shipping commis¬ 
sioner.” That is the law theoretically, but practically the hoarding-house master gets 
it. I have been shot at trying to carry out the law. I have been authorized to make 
life safe, and carry a medal to that end, and by it I exercise my authority. 

Mr. Cox. You say the law is not carried out. What do you suggest as an amend¬ 
ment to that law to make it effective ? 

Dr. Thoms. Do away with fees of every kind relating to the shipping of seamen. 

The Chairman. What harm does the fee do? 

Dr. Thoms. It creates a monopoly. Give men free trade and the evils of the system 
will cure themselves. 

Mr. Cox. What do yon mean by that ? 

Dr. Thoms. Give the ship-owners an opportunity of engaging men themselves. 

The Chairman. You think if such were the case the land-sharks would not inter¬ 
fere with respectable and good men, and the law would be carried out better than it 
is now ? 

Dr. Thoms. Yes, sir ; they would refuse to take any blood money. 

Mr. Candler. How was it before the shipping law was passed? 

Dr. Thoms. These agents never took a dollar. 

Mr. Candler. Did not the captain have the right to ship men before this law Avas 
passed ? If-so, why did it not succeed then ? 

Dr. Thoms. Because of the advance system. ' 

Mr. Candler. You think the abolition of this advance system would cure the evil? 

Dr. Thoms. Yes, sir. The evils will cure themselves if you give freedom to the 
sailor and owner. Theie will be no evil to cure; but the system of advance wages 
makes the saih raslave and enslaves the owner. The owner cannot do as he likes 
on account of this advance system. 

Mr. Candler. 'The sailor was abused long before the law was passed, and you wish 
to abolish the advance system. 

Dr. Thoms. That is the only remedy you can apply to this evil ? 

Mr. Miller. Do you propose abolishing the shipping commission ? 


232 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Dr. Thoms. The law is very good, but the trouble arises from the advance system 
and the system of fees. We prefer to have the law as it is now, and do away with 
the advance system and the money part of it. 

Mr. Miller. How is the shipping commission to be sustained; by the United States 
Treasury ? 

Dr. Thoms. I have no opinion in regard to that. 

Mr. Miller. Then you believe in abolishing the wages system? 

Dr. Thoms. The shipowner would be content with the arrangement with the sailor, 
and none of the land-sharks would have an opportunity to take advantage of them. 

The Chairman. The la w in theory and the law in fact is different from what I sup-. 
pose it is. The courts are open to any man, and if he needs any legislation I should 
be very glad to assist in making it easier to open the courts. The law of theory for 
one purpose and the law of fact for another I don’t understand. The law is positive 
and correct, and can be enforced anywhere; I should think that the representative of 
fifty thousand sailors ought to be able to enforce it. I will read a sentence from Cap¬ 
tain Slocum, captain of a vessel from Shanghai. He says “that the laws are made by 
farmers and not by commercial men, who in theory desire to do right, but they have 
no accurate knowledge.” 

Mr. Miller. What laws do you refer to? 

The Chairman. United States laws. 

Mr. Cox. I think the doctor has traced the fault to the district attorney’s office. 

Mr. Dingley. Suppose you furnish, in writing, to the committee, specific instances 
in yvhich offenses were brought before the district attorney and lie refused to take 
action upon them. 

Mr. Candler (interrupting). I would like to ask Commissioner Duncan a question 
in regard to advance wages, as I should like to get liis opinion. Would the abolition 
of advance wages cure the evil of blood money ? 

Captain Duncan. Yes, sir. I firmly believe it because of the experience which 
comes to me every day in steamers and iu sailing vessels. Steamers do not pay the 
advance wages, and I have never heard yet of the charge of blood money connected 
with steamers. Sailing vessels collect blood money all the time; this rests upon the 
system of advance wages. I recommend the abolition of the advance system, with the 
qualification that it applies to every vessel and every nation, in American ports; other¬ 
wise I would not recommend it at all. Touching the remarks Dr. Thoms has made 
regarding the district attorney, my experience has been this: In every case they have 
been heartily willing and anxious to take up prosecutions of this kind. I have car¬ 
ried several hundred cases before the district attorney, and he has never refused to 
take prompt action. We take the sailor along with us; he makes a statement which 
is taken before a United States commissioner; the men charged are asked to appear. 
Next day the accused is brought before the shipping master, whoever he may be. The 
sailor disappears when the case comes up. He cannot be found. You cannot get the 
testimony; the sailor in every case disappears. 

Mr. Miller. Why is not the sailor detained? 

The Witness. Because there is no law that will hold him. 

Captain Duncan. It is not a criminal offense. 

Mr. Cox (to Dr. Thoms) Have you any response to make to that, Dr. Thoms? 

Dr. Thoms. I agree with the commissioner. 

Mr. Cox. Do they try to get the sailor? 

Dr. Thoms. I have had no cases brought to trial. 

Mr. Cox. Was there ever much effort made iu the district attorney’s office to bring 
up these cases? 

Dr. Thoms Yes, sir; considerable. It was very difficult for me to get them to 
hear it. 

Mr. Cox. How many cases have been presented? 

Dr. Thoms. I do not know, but I have tried several. 

Mr. Cox. Who shut you out? 

Dr. Tiioms. The boarding-house masters. I have been in the Sailors’ Home all my 
hie, and I was in danger on account of my life in trying to stop this blood money. \ 
was deaf for six months from being struck on the head. 

Di. 1 homs submitted the following statement at the conclusion of his examination: 

STATEMENT BY DR. THOMAS AS TO “BLOOD MONEY.” 

1 he blood money system’ is the bonus that seamen have to pay in order to obtain 
a situation on board of all vessels; it varies from $5 to $15, according to the amount 
of advance wages the sailor is to receive. 

The “ blood money is divided up among the boarding-house keepers, shipping- 
masters, runners, Arc., and a number of shipowners are involved in the system. It 
always comes out ot the advance wages which the law expressly states should go to the 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


233 


family ol the sailor. The “blood money system ” prevents the sailor, who has a fam¬ 
ily, Irom obtaining any situation on hoard of a vessel and enslaves every sailor to the 
hoarding-house keeper, who compels the sailor to go on board of vessels, paying him 
the hi best blood money, which lie takes out of the advance wages of the sailor by 
this system. No American sailor can obtain a situation unless he goes into a sailor 
boarding-house and allows the boarding-house keeper to pay the blood money out of 
his advance wages. 

In order to abolish the “ blood money” it is necessary to do away with the advance 
wages, which is the cause of all the difficulties that seamen have to meet with. It 
never goes to the sailor’s family, which the laws require it to go, but to the boarding¬ 
house keepers, shipping-masters, runners, &c., who make the sailor drunk, surround 
them with all the evil influences in order that they may get his advance wages. Do 
away with the advance wages and you will save the sailor, save the shipowner, make 
the ship safe, and redeem the sailor from all the evil influences which surround him 
while in port. 

The following a few of the thousand of cases of “blood money” that we have on 
oar books: 

Southern District of New York: 

Peter Wilkinson and John Sherer, being duly sworn, each for himself say, we shipped 
in the Brig Wanderer, Captain Welly, master, the 28th day of January, 1877, for a 
voyage to Havana in the West Indies. We shipped as able seamen at $20 each per 
month, and $25 advance. Of this advance it took $20 to clear our bill with the board¬ 
ing master, He <ry Smith, Albany street, North River. The other$5 neither of us got. 

We was told that Captain Spencer, part owner, claimed and took the $5 for giving 
us a chance. Henry Smith said so. Captain Spencer does business in Wall street, 
with Simpson, Clapp & Co. There were six seamen before the mast, each of them 
was cut off $5. The other men are at Smith’s boarding-house, Peter Thompson, Henry 
Nelson, Christian Neilson, Silas Smith. 

We left the vessel Saturday, April 21, the day we arrived in this pott. 

PETER WILKINSON. 

JOHN SHERER. 


Name. 


Boarding house. 


Joseph Bernard. 

James Jansen. 

Emaniel McVicker. 

W. J. Smith. 

John Sehemanns-- 

Oust at Lerpling. 

Bernard Nader. 

Edward Kroucher. 

William Morris. 

John Gould . 

William Leng. 

Henry Rnforth .. 

John R Forrester. 

William Carlos. 

John Johnson . 

Conrad Thomsen . 

John Luml jy. .•. 

Samuel Johnson . 

Henry Gray. 

James L MeMurray ... 
Nathan E. Johnston. .. 

John Gibson . 

William Brown . 

Thomas Kelley . 

Charles J. Taylor. 

Charles Brown. 

David Anderson. 

Frederick R. Thompson 

Joseph Wood. 

William Jager. 

Michael McCormack ... 
William 1 ruax ... 

Johnston R. Mills. 

Henry Di.uglats. 

Thomas L. Lainer .. 

James Robinson. 

John Wright. 

James Binnghan . 

Thomas Gibbs. 

William Lanigan. 

Henr Holman. 

John Kinney . 

Thomas Denman. 


69 Monroe street. 

36 James street. 

42 Hamilton street. 

175 Cherry street. 

Sailor Home. 

Do. 

65 Market street. 

Sailor Home. 

38 Market street. 

Do. 

25 Water street. 

11 Cherry street. 

26 Monroe street. 

34 Market street. 

Sailor Home. 

14 Thomas street. 

28 Oliver street. 

45 Oliver street. 

52 Oliver street. 

17 Hamilton street. 
Sailor’s Home. 

38 Market street. 

79 Madison street. 

38 Market street. 

42 James street. 

179 Cherry street. 

9 Carlisle street. 

370 Water street. 

41 Oliver street. 

15 Hamilton street. 

370 Water street. 

161 Washington street. 
50 Market street. 

29 Cherry street. 

101 Washington street. 

10 Monroe street. 

79 Madison street. 

45 Oak street. 

190 Cherry street. 

45 Market street. 

47 James street. 

72 Market street. 

74 Madison street. 























































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


2J4 


i 


Name. 


Boarding-house. 


Joseph Foley.- 

John Kelley. 

Charles Helm.. 

C. M. Shelton. 

Henry Meyrs. 

Peter Murphy-,. 

John Johnston.. 

William Johnson.- . 

Frederick Stuart Hamilton. 

John U. Campbell . 

James J. Springer. 

Charles Bowerman... 

Frank Kelley.. 

John Read. 

Alfred Johnson. 

Charles S. Smith. 

George Thompson... 

James O’Neil . 

James Falconer.. 

Bedford Read. 

Charles Dolan. 

George Nelson. 

William John Tucker. 

James Forbes. 

Fiank Philips. 

P. Taker. 

James Kelley. . 

Hugh McDonald. 

Charles Gardner. 

John Lang. . 

Thomas Reed.. 

William O. Neil. . r . 

Oscar Lenox. 

Jeremiah. 

R. O. Reurden. .. 

Frank G. Hull. 

William Campbell. 

Carl Frederikens .. 

Patrick Simmons.v. 

W. I. English. . 

Carl Jensan.. .. .. 

William Roberts .. 

Edward Marshall . 

James Callanders. 

John Williams.. 

Edward Holm . 

Lewis Pettis. 

Samuel Scott. 

And thousands of others. 


6 Hamilton street. 

60 Market street. 
Barque Northumbria. 
160 Washington street. 
41 Oliver street. 

38 Market street. 

Do. 

80'James street. 

28 Hamilton street. 

79 Madison street. 

Ship Morgan City. 

118 Greenwich street. 

4 James Slip. 

85 Greenwich street. 

84 Cherry street. 

118 Greenwich. 

22 Oliver street. 

54 Market street. 

282 front street. 

88 Oliver street. 

79 Oliver street. 

39 Oliver street. 

54 Market street. 

25 Hamilton street. 

24 Monroe street. 

47 Oliver street. 

Sailor’s Home. 

Do. 

338 Pearl street. 

13 Hamilton street. 

62 Cherry street, 
la Hamilton street. 

19 West street. 

Ship Cruiser. 

Ship Blue Jacket. 

4 Carlisle street. 

103 Front street, 
lo Monroe street. 

26 Monroe street. 

5 Peck Slip. 

Schooner Rover. 

67 Monroe street. 

45 Cherry street. 

116 Madison street. 

24 Hamiltou street. 
Sailer’s Home. 

50 Market street. 

41 Oliver street. 


SUGGESTIONS IN REGARD TO THE REMEDY FOR THE DECLINE OF AMERICAN SHIPPING 

INTERESTS. 

The causes are: 

1. The fee system at home and abroad. 

2. The advance-wages system. 

3. The removal of the tax on foreign cargoes in foreign vesse's. 

The remedies are: 

1. The abolishment of all the fee systems at home and abroad. 

2. The abolishment of all the advance-wages systems at home and abroad. 

This would set the ship-owner and the sailor free, and enable the American ship to 
compete with foreign shipping in all parts of the world. 

The fee system is the great cause of the trouble in our consular service. Citizens 
residing abroad, those who have had occasion to travel in foreign countries, as well 
as those engaged in foreign trade and commerce, have alike been the victims of the 
rapacity of the unscrupulous among these officials, and unanimous in their denun¬ 
ciations of the unfitness and incapacity of the appointees. Receiving tlieir commis¬ 
sions as a reward of party services and to satisfy the importunity of their friends, it 
would seem as though interest for the position had been among the last things thought 
of, sending men who scarcely know one end of a ship from another to foreign ports 
for the ostensible purpose of administering our shipping laws and to protecT the in¬ 
terests of our citizens. 

LETTERS. 

Dr. William F. Thoms, 

President of the Seamen's Aid and Protective Association : 

Dear Sir: I have the honor once more to bring to your notice a subject of vital 
impoitance to the shipping interests of the United States. I inclose herewith an 































































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


235 


aiticlt‘ published in the Shanghai Mercury. The writer proceeds to give some of the 
causes ot the disappearance ot American shipping, at one time so popular, but now 
seldom seen or heard of abroad, except through United States consular reports. Our 
ships are truly hampered by laws regulating the shipping and discharge of seamen, 
while our most successful competitors are free to discharge or change crews in almost 
all parts ot the world and without extra expense, except the usual shipping-fee, which 
is just half we pay. Our marine laws are made and carried out with a true eye to the 
pecuniary interest of the Treasury, and the captain of an American ship finds it im¬ 
possible to discharge, be they good, bad, or indifferent, except with the alternative of 
three mouths’ extra wages, one month to government and two mouths for the sailors, 
which they, the sailors, seldom or never get. Your good shore people will not under¬ 
stand why a seaman may not be discharged without this tribute to the government, 
where such change is desirable for man or master, and at a port where sailors can 
alwa\ s find ready ships. That part of our law providing for the return home of Ameri¬ 
can seamen is a farce. I can’t see why the laws of a free country should be so strin¬ 
gent. 1 he great impediment to our shipping is the much greater agricultural interests; 
our marine laws, in fact, aie made by farmers. 

While unjust lawsuits have ruined some of my acquaintances, we have all been 
faithfully squeezed by our consular department until the net profits of that institu¬ 
tion amount to $‘.100,000 per annum; and this from ships the whole fleets of which 
grow, mourn fully less as our fees grow painfully heavy; $300,000 of unjust money', not 
mentioning other hundreds ot thousands unaccounted for from a class trying to com¬ 
pete with favored owners in hard times, comes doubly hard. I respectfully ask that 
you will present these points to the Committee on Commerce so that we will receive 
some redress from the government. 

Respectfully, yours, &c., 

JAMES SLOCUM. 


The following letter specifies some of the charges against the fee system: 


It is of vital importance to the shipping interests of the United States, and of alt 
honest Americans, that the doings of our misrepresentati ves should be investigated. 
I will give one case in poiut which happened to your correspondent at Shanghai: 
After many voyages, always paying tribute (I can term it nothing else), I finally sold 
my v essel, which transaction necessitated the further payment of three months’ extra 
wages to all hands, two-thirds of this for the crew and one-third for the govern¬ 
ment, as I then supposed. Before the crew left the office every man reshipped in the 
same vessel tor the same wuxges. I was electrified to learn, however, two years later, 
that the department had not learned of the sale of the vessel; I was happy to set the 
department right, and sorry to learn that all the money in taxes and tribute, instead 
of swelling the revenue of our country, had gone in another direction. But for the 
accident of striking an unknown rock, now called the Robymar Rock, in Bay of 
Foochow, this vessel might have continued to run unknown to the department. The 
captain’s report to the hydrographic department of this accident led to the amazing 
discovery that she was still in existence, and, by right of law, a source of revenue 
to the government, not to consuls. There are many other irregularities of a rough 
nature unexplained and inexplicable. But our consulate is not the only branch of 
civil service where everything is sworn confusion. Our custom-house papers require 
more swearing than is necessary; for simplicity and clearness of method we cannot 
compare with the Chinese; even the Japanese are ahead of us. Returning to our 
consulate, I find that when a sailor dies or deserts, I have to again disglorify God’s 
name, this time in black and white—none of your cheap custom-house swearing. 
The worst lias not been told; no paper will publish it. These thi» gs will surely be 
changed for the better when they are properly shown up to Americans who cau read 
and reason; and that class is beginning to see the necessity of taking in hand the 
reins of government, otherwise a whirlwind will sweep tin se institutions from the 
face of the earth so clean that there will be a putrid reminiscence of the past. 

JAMES SLOCUM, 

Bark Amethyst. 


AT HOME. 


The same condition of things prevails at our home ports. The ship-owners and the 
sailors are made slaves by means of the fee system aud the advance ssstem of wages. 
The land-sharks, by means of these systems, compel the ship-owner to obey them. A 
government officer lias given evidence before this commrtee that the fee system puts 
$20,000 into his office every year by act of Congress in this port alone. The land-sharks 
in this city alone obtain nearly $1,000,000 every year from the ship-owners and the 
sailors by means of the advance system of wages. The ‘‘blood money” system, of 
which the sailors so loudly complain, will be done away with when the advance sys- 
system of wages are discontinued. 

1 Abolish the fee system and the advance wages system and you will abolish the “ land- 
shark” and the “ blood money ” system, and the ship-owner will then find good steady 


n o "» 
_ O i 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


men who are uncontrolled by the boarding-house keepers, and come on board sober 
men, ready to attend to their duties, and protect the lives and property of the owners. 

SAFETY OX THE SEA. 

The sect etary desires to call your attention to the safety of the lives and property on 
board of American vessels. Tlmy would recommend that no officer be allowed on 
board who has not a certificate from some board of examination or nautical school. 


STATEMENT OF MESSRS. EDW. LAUTERBACH AND J. B. HOUSTON, PA¬ 
CIFIC MAIL STEAMSHIP COMPANY. 

Mr. Edward Lauterbach, counsel, and Mr. J. B. Houston, president of the Pacific 
Mail Steamship Company, appeared before the committee. 

Mr. Lauterbach said: 

I am not here on behalf of the Pacific Mail Steamship Company for any subsidy or 
bounty in any shape, form, or manner. Much has been said on this subject, and if the 
Argument of Mr. Roach and others on the subject are not cogent enough to convince 
you of the importance of sustaining American commerce in that direction, I can add 
nothing to it. In conference with the president of the company, wo have decided to 
make no such appeal on our behalf, leaving the question of England’s example, whether 
America should follow it, for this committee. It has been said that this business of 
sailing ships on the ocean is like any other business, and ought to stand ou its own bot¬ 
tom, and that the government should not treat this enterprise as a child in swaddling 
clothes any more than any other. Whether this particular industry is to be protected 
while you protect manufacturing interests is for you to determine. But if we are to be 
treated as an independent enterprise not to be supported, it is fair to ask of your com¬ 
mittee that it should not be crushed by legislation. The Pacific Mail Steamship Com¬ 
pany is the only corporation engaged in foreign trade. It was established in 1835. It 
has beenmore or less successful; in late years it has not been as successful as formerly. 
It has struggled along for the last ten years without any dividends to the stock¬ 
holders. We have run under adverse circumstances, which have been mainly the 
result of the law which Congress has enacted. The law I refer to is the mail law, 
which exists on the statutes of the United States, which Congress lias enacted, but 
which is unjust. Give us no protection, no subsidy, no assistance, but don’t insist 
that this corporation shall be compelled to do work for the Government of the United 
States without fair compensation. Is this just ? If we are not to be assisted, are we 
to be crushed ? The sections of the law 10 which I refer say that no corporation shall 
receive a clearance until it receives on board and securely conveys such mails as the 
Post-Office Department of the United States or any minister, consul, or commercial 
officer of the United States abroad shall offer, and shall promptly deliver the same to 
the proper authorities on arriving at the port of destination, and shall receive for 
such service such reasonable compensation as may be allowed by law. 

Under what circumstances? Under fair compensation, to be fixed between the Post¬ 
master-General and the corporation carrying the mail ? No. Upon a contract that 
Congress shall enact? No. Upon a contract based upon a contract with a railroad 
for such service ? No. How then? You shall not obtain a clearance for your vessel 
unless you take the letters of the United States at two cents per letter. The govern¬ 
ment says: We arbitrarily refuse you a clearance from the port unless you render our 
service at that price. You say there is another section modifying this. The Post¬ 
master-General has a right to insist upon the carrying of the mail. The other section 
permits him to give such compensation as provided by law, but the law limits him to 
the amount received by the government per letter. But the government has entered 
into treaties for cheap postage. At whose expense is this cheap postal service created ? 
Does the United States pay for that service? No, sir; it turns around to the Pacific 
Mail Steamship Company and makes us pay it. That is the condition of the law. Is 
that fair ? Is that just ? W hat we ask tor is t his : that we be permitted to do our own 
business in our own way. If the United States Government will give us adequate 
compensation we can do it. We should have the same right that an ordinary bidder 
at auction lia->. Unbind our hands, unfetter us! Is it fair or just to say that for two 
cents a letter, and without our consent, we shall be refused a clearance, and shall not 
be permitted to leave port until we have carried out a one-sided contract like that. 

Mr. Cox. Can you tell me just what the Pacific Mail Steamship Company is doing 
and where it is doing it? 

Mr. Lauterbach. We are on the Pacific, and run to China, Australia, Mexico, and 
Central America. 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


237 


Mr. Cox. How many ships have yon ? 

Mr. Lauterbach. Twenty, altogether. 

Mr. Cox. All on the Pacific? 

Mr. Lauterbach. Three or four on the Atlantic, running between here and Aspin- 
wa.ll. 

Mr. Cox. Do the British line of steamers running between San Francisco and China 
get any subsidy or higher compensation than the Pacific Mail gets? 

Mr. Lauterbach. I don’t know; hut I know according to law they can either take 
the mail or leave it. With them it is a voluntary act. 

Mr. Houston (interrupting). Yes, there is a subsidy. 

Mr. Cox. How much ? 

Mr. Houston. They are supported by overland railroads 

Mr. Cox (to Mr. Lauteibach). Are the British lines more profitable than 3 our 
company ? 

Mr. Lauterbach. I don’t know that they are. The Overland line controls these 
steamers and see that they lose nothing by their business. 

Mr. Cox. If you could have bought your ships where the British ships were bought, 
would it have been more profitable? 

Mr. Lauterbach. If we had bought ships cheaper on the Clyde than here, of course 
it would. 

Mr. Cox. Are you in favor of buying your ships where you please? 

Mr. Lauterbach. Yes, sir; but experience has shown us that the difference in 
amount of cost is so small that if the present law were abolished and free trade in ships 
initiated it would be almost impossible to have our repairs done on foreign built ships. 
The Colon broke her shaft. We had to send to the Clyde to get it replaced, and it 
took a long time. We are interested in seeing American manufacturers and ship¬ 
builders protected. 

Mr. Cox. Your interest runs parallel with the people who have ships built here at 
even a greater price ? 

Mr. Lauterbach. Last year we built three new steamers. Before they were built 
inquiries were made as to what they would cost here and abroad. It was found to be 
a little more ilian 10 per cent.; but, on the other hand, they could be speedily re¬ 
paired, becau* they were built here. 

Mr. Cox. You don’t want any subsidy? 

Mr. Lauterbach. No, sir. 

Mr. Cox. Did you look over your books to see how much subsidy you got from the 
United States Government ? 

Mr. Lauterbach. 1 do not know, sir. The company has been entirely reorganized 
since that date. It is run on a different basis now. 

Mr. Cox. You don’t know anything about the money paid in those days? 

Mr. Lauterbach. No, sir; I do not. I will proceed. The total amount of carriage 
for actual mail service last year was 323,000 miles. For that service we received 
$23,930.19, or at the rate of two-thirds of a cent for every mile. The law allows rail¬ 
road companies a maximum of $300 per mile per year. 

Mr. Dingeey. How much would a coastwise steamer receive for carrying the mails? 

Mr. Houston. Whatever the Post Office Department agreed upon as a fair compen¬ 
sation. 

Mr. Dingeey. You wish them equalized? 

Mr. Houston. Yes, sir; foreign and coastwise. Railroads are paid according to 
service actually rendered. 

Mr. Candler. A steamer would carry the mail onee a month? 

Mr. Lauterbach. More frequently. It would be rather difficult to find the aggre¬ 
gate amounts paid. Section 3997 provides that we shall deliver the mail to the post¬ 
master, and this includes cartage to be paid by us, which almost equals the total 
compensation paid us by the government. It costs us as much to carry the mail to 
the post-office from our steamer dock as we receive for rendering the whole service 
from all the ports. From all sources from the United States Government during the last 
year we received $23,939.19 for carrying the mails, while we paid to the government 
in different ways $43,917.15. . 

Mr. Miller. How much compensation are ships allowed ? Does the law prescribe it? 

Mr. Lauterbach. Yes. sir; two cents a letter, or the amount paid to the govern¬ 
ment. I ask on behalf of the Pacific Mail Steamship Company, a repeal of sections 39i G 
and 4203 of the Revis- d Statutes, which provide that 110 ship shall clear for a foreign 
port unless it take such mails as the government may pr< scribe. 

Mr. Miller. Would you not be better satisfied with some law which would give 

just compensation ? . 

Mr. Lauterbach. Yes, sir; we would then be independent parties to make our 

contracts as we might agree upon. 

The Chairman (to Mr. Houston). Can you give the committee any idea of the 
amount of mail you have carried? 


238 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Houston. There were 500,000 letters on the China and Japan line last year, 
for which we received the sum of $1,681.01 for outward and $110.84 for inward. 

The Chairman. Does your line carry the India mail overland ? 

Mr. Houston. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you make any contract with the British Government for that f 

Mr. Houston. No, sir; we have no contract. We are obliged to receive all mails 
that are put on our ships by any postmaster or consul. 

The Chairman. If there is an overland mail from San Francisco to China, do you 
have to carry it ? 

Mr. Houston. Yes, sir. We have a subsidy of $400,000 a year with the Australian 
Government, but none with the British Government. Between San Francisco and 
Sydney we stop at Honolulu, and Auckland, in New Zealand. 

Mr. Lauterbach. I now desire to revert to the question of local and State taxation. 
It rests now in good shape. We were subjected to a very large tax formerly, and 
were obliged to pay large sums of money. The State has finally done us justice, and 
the law was suspended for fifteen years taxing the capital stock of corporations like 
Pacific Mail. American ships are not subject to taxation for that period. This law, 
however, can be repealed. I suggest to this committee that a United States law be 
passed pioviding for the exemption of American vessels engaged in foreign commerce 
from State, local, and municipal taxation. We now pay for harbor-master and wharf 
privileges. In order to avoid injustice, I suggest a law be passed giving the govern¬ 
ment a right to take vessels for war purposes, and in consideration therefor these ves¬ 
sels should be exempt from local and State taxation. They should be exempted in 
every sea-coast State of the Union, as they now are in two of the States. If the United 
States should make these vessels part of their naval armament, they would come 
under their jurisdiction and be exempt from State and local taxation. This was a 
suggestion of Senator Beck. 

I desire to show how these various exactions have affected us. We complain more 
of the character of them than the amount. The whole amount received by the Treas¬ 
ury Department under the tonnage tax from all the vessels of the United States is 
only a little in excess of $1,000,000. It was intended as an addition to the shipping 
fund. I t hink we should be exempt from the imposition of 30 cent toimage tax now 
imposed upon us. We pay the sum of $13,925 for tonnage annually. " 

The Chairman. Don’t you know that if we abolish tonnage dues for our own ships 
we must abolish it for foreign ships? 

Mr. Lauterbach. Yes, sir. But we would not object to taking the tax off of for¬ 
eign ships. They pay light-house dues; we don’t. Section 4225 provides that “ a 
duty of 50 cents per ton to be denominated ‘ light money ’ shall be levied and collected 
on all vessels nor of the United States which may enter the ports of the United States. 
Such light money shall be levied and collected in a like manner under the same regu¬ 
lations as the tonnage duties.” 

I come now to the question of discharging crews by the United States Commis¬ 
sioner and United States consuls. This should not be done at our expense. The 
shipping commissioner’s office, if continued, should be made a portion of some depart¬ 
ment of the government so that an appeal from any ruling could be made to the head 
of the department instead of the United States circuit court, to whom alone the ship¬ 
ping commissioner is responsible. The ship owners should not be compelled to pay for 
the expenses of the ship commissioner’s office. Last year we paid $6,110.75 to the ship¬ 
ping commissioner, or about one-tenth of the whole amount received by him. From 
that payment I ask that the ship owners be relieved. 

Mr. Cox. The law provides that that amount may be deducted from whatever con¬ 
tract you may make with the sailor. 

Mr. Lauterbach. There is an amount, of rebate provided, but the amount paid to 
the commissioner is $2, and the rebate 50 cents. We would still be considerably out. 
Our expenses for receiving and shipping men is over $8,000 per annum over and above 
any reimbursement to ourselves provided by statute. , 

This three months’ extra pay is prejudicial to American seamen. We perform ser¬ 
vice between Panama on the south and Acapulco on the north. It would be very de¬ 
sirable if we could engage American seamen, but the law prevents us from so doing. 
Suppose a ship desires to clear for any port on the coast, we have to pay for what 
would be twenty-four days’ service, not twenty-four days’ pay on being discharged at 
Panama, but for 114 days’ service. This law compels us to pay four months’ service 
for one month’s work. We cannot afford to ship American seamen outside of this 
country. W T e ask for the repeal of section 4582, allowing three months’ extra pay to 
American sailors discharged in foreign ports. The law is an effectual bar against'the 
successful employment of seamen. 

The Chairman. The law provides for paying, and only paying, $2 lor the shipment 
of any member of a crew, and for discharging a member 50 cents. The law provides 
that the vessel or master may deduct from the wages of each member of the crew for 
shipping 25 cents, and for discharging? 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


230 


Mr. Lauterbach. I hat’s the amount we are out. If we could make the contract 
direct with the seamen, we could engage them by the year to make regular service, 
and could pay the United States commissioner whenever we engaged and whenever we 
discharged ; it would be a small amount. But the law very singularly provides that 
at every trip we shall engage and discharge our seamen, and then makes a distinction, 
by section 4511, that “the master of every vessel bound from a port in the United States 
to any foreign port other than vessels engaged in trade between the United States and 
the British North American possessions, or the West India Islands, or the Republic 
ot Mexico, or ot any vessel of the burden of 75 tons or upward, bound from a port on 
the Atlantic to a port on the Pacific, or vice versa, shall, before he proceeds on such 
voyage, make an agreement, in writing or in print, with every seaman whom he car¬ 
ries’ : v * * which agreement shall contain “the nature, and, as far as practica¬ 

ble, the duration ot the intended yoyage or engagement, and the port or country at 
which the voyage is to terminate.” 

The Alexander line between here and Mexico can ship crews as long as they please, 
but, we who goto Mexico, developing the same commerce and traveling a few hundred 
miles farther in the same direction, are compelled every time to discharge and reship the 
whole crew. It the shipping commissioner’s service is continued, we ask that it be 
amended so as to apply to all vessels plying between foreign and domestic ports. 

The Chairman. Does not the law provide that a master may engage his crew for 
any length ot time ? Section 4515 reads: “ Where the seamen are by custom or agree¬ 
ment entitled to participate, in the profits or result of a cruise or voyage they may 
by agreement serve on board such vessels for a definite time, or on the return of any 
vessel to a port in the United States may resliip and sail in another vessel on an¬ 
other voyage without the payment of additional fees to the shipping commissioner 
by either the seaman or the master.” 

Mr. Lauterbach. Yes, but that does not apply to foreign vessels like our own, as 
you will see by reading the section. The following table gives the amount paid by 
us for different charges : » 

Fees paid United States Government by Pacific Mail Steamship Company during the year 

1881. 


Port. 

Tonnage dues. 1 

Shipping and discharging 
crews by United States 
commissioners. 2 

Shipping and discharging 
crews by United States 
consuls. 3 

o 

<D 

< 4 -. 

%-* 

8- 

o 

c c 

0 

H 

Clearance fees, vessel and 
cargo. 6 

Entrance fees, vessel and j 
cargo. 6 

1 

Night officer and inspec¬ 
tor. 7 

Survey. 1 

Post entry and affidavit. 9 ! 

1 

New York. 

Aspinwall. 

$3, 237 90 
307 66 
483 93 

$2,814 50 

$7 50 
1,857 00 

$818 80 

$547 40 
68 00 

$586 80 

$800 00 


$116 40 

Panama. 

. 




$5 50 


San ,Tos6 de G_ 






Acapulco. 



72 00 





10 00 


Manzanilla. 








San Francisco... 
Honolulu. 

9,156 60 
140 96 
160 72 
140 68 

3, 296 25 


1,418 70 

100 00 
14 00 

147 00 

410 00 

120 00 

79 20 

Auckland . 







Sydney.. 


3 00 


14 00 





Yokohama. 

HonP'-TConp - . 







273 60 









Total. 









13,902 05 

6, 110 75 

. 

2, 267 50 

743 40 

733 80 

1,210 00 

135 50 

195 60 


•Secs. 4219-4223. 

* Secs. 4592-4593 and p. 896. 

8 1517-4580, 4582; amount of fees not specified in statutes. 
4 Sec. 4458. 

6 Sec. 4197-4381, 2654 (2d). 

8 1381, 2654 (1st). 

7 2657-2871.; fees not specified in statute. 

8 4562 (?) 

9 4381-2654 (?); not otherwise specified. 








































































240 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


\ 


Fees paid United States Government, $'C. —Continued. 


Port. 

Permits. 1 

rs 

a 

a 

03 

2 -j 

t 3 
*§ 
rO 

to 

£ 

Lien on freight. 

Official certificate 
and oaths. 

_ 

Shippers’ mani¬ 

fests. 

Supplementary 

manifests. 

W 

GC 

-4—* 

»—< 

fs 

9 

' 5 

y> 

OQ 

r O 

M 

$2 00 

*5 

n 

s 

p4 

<0 

u 

cc 

be 

bfl 

cS 

« 

$7 20 

New York. 

$57 40 

$107 60 

$7 00 



$6 80 

$36 00 




$6 50 

















. 















15 00 



7 80 


11 80 

53 05 

$18 00 



































12 00 









. 



Total. 









65 20 

107 60 18 80 

59 55 ' 18 00 

6 80 

48 00 

17 00 7 20 


•2654. 2 4573. *2654. 


Port. 

General Orders 
bond. 

Noting protest. 

| 

Extending protest. 

| 

Chronometer per¬ 
mit. 

Copy of protest. 

& 

CZ 

a 

0 

u 

p 

5 

5 

O 

§3.o 

O c3 

1«> 

"a a 
a S 

2 c 

0 

O 

> Health officer. 

| Medical inspec¬ 
tion, 1 

New York . 

$7 20 

$36 00 
72 00 
78 00 
14 00 
36 00 

5 00 
135 00 

2 00 

$10 50 

5 50 

$7 20 

$30 00 

$6 00 


$234 00 





10 00 

... . 



Son »Tos6 fin (4- 






A napnlr.o .. _. 









IVf fl/nza/nilla .. 








San Francisco . 

23 60 



5 00 

2 00 

$41 00 



TTrmol ulu 





Auckland . 








Sydney ... .. 


14 00 








Yokohama . . 








$128 85 

Hong-Kong . 


18 00 







Total . 








30 80 

410 00 

16 00 

7 20 

35 00 

18 00 

41 00 

234 00 

128 85 


Chapter 202, laws 1879. Rules and Regulations of the National Board of Health, approved Novem¬ 
ber!, 1881. Fees, circular letter of department dated June 20, 1881. 


Port. 

Affidavit to can¬ 
cel crew bond. 

Certifying passen¬ 
ger lists and 
manifests 1 . 

Certificate to ar¬ 
ticles. 

Certificate to de¬ 
posit of papers, 
&c. 

Certificate of dead 
passenger 2 . 

_ 

Desertion and or¬ 
der of arrest. 

Certificate to sig¬ 
nature. 

Certificate of ac¬ 
knowledgement. 

New York. 

$72 00 







Aspinwall ... 

$100 00 


$1< 4 00 

ro on 

$2 50 
47 00 


Panama. 

San Jose de G.. 

. 


$16 00 

2 00 

6 50 

$4 00 

Acapulco. 




1 50 

. 


Manzanilla .. 







San Francisco. 




20 00 


. 


Honolulu. 







Auckland. 

. 





. 



Sydney . 





50 

2 50 

. 


Yokohama . 







Hong-Kong. 


30 00 







Total. 








72 00 

130 00 

16 00 

104 00 

24 00 24 50 

.49 50 

4 00 


1 2654. 


2 4268. 






















































































































































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


241 


T -v , CZ Oj 

Port. « ® 

> 

t f 

i D 

G ’-C 

® S 

1 •** p, 

A P 

CJ M 

Certificate of log. 

Bill of health and vise 
same 2 . 

Copy of roll for capt. of 
port. 

Examination of passen¬ 

gers and crew. 

Miscellaneous. 

Total. 

1 

New York. 




$9, 532 00 
913 16 
2, 673 43 
16 50 
123 50 
9 00 
15,118 45 
539 56 
168 22 
199 18 
161 90 
2,389 95 

Aspinwall. $72 00 

$137 50 


$90 00 
47 50 



Panama. 




San J os6 de G . 


$250 



Acapulco. 



$4 00 


Manzanilla. 


4 00 



San Francisco. 





Honolulu. 



17 50 

7 50 
12 50 

7 00 
22 50 


$360 10 

Auckland. 



. 


Sydney . 





Yokohama. 




154 90 

Hong-Kong. 




1 917 00 




. 


Total. 72 00 

137 50 

6 50 

204 50 

4 00 

2,432 00 57 25 

31, 844 85 


Local fees paid during gear 1881. 


Port. 


New York .... 
San Francisco 

Total ... 





. 


* 


02 

3 eo 

** 


O 

■ ( r* 

G O 

3 

p, 

G . 


d ward 
survey 

5 

be 


.2 * 

2 w 

3 2 

G 

S.'S 
a a 

Wl 

g>2 

•S G 
pHr- 


cz 

'T 


S 3 

cC 

.2-2 

CZ 

4^ 

o 

a 


0- 

o* 

cd 

o 

ffl 

o 


o 


H 

$555 00 

Still 00 




$666 00 






3, 000 00 

600 

00 

$6, 229 30 

$465 00 

$1,170 00 

11,464 30 

3,555 00 

711 

00 

6, 229 30 

465 00 

1,170 00 

12,130 30 


Total paid United States Government. $31, 844 85 

Total paid local government. 12,130 30 

Grand total. 43,975 15 


We are compelled to pay, in addition to the regular quarantine charge, nearly $4,000 
for the inspection of our passengers. Unfortunately for us a very large proportion of 
the amount of travel from the East fell off after the passage of the Chinese immigration 
law. The principle, however, was wrong, and the law should be abolished. 

The Chairman. Some portion of the cost of manifest and fees is chargeable to 
cargo. 

Mr. LauterbacH. We have taken no fee in any case where we were reimbursed. 

The Chairman. The manifest, &c., are supposed to be included in the freight charges, 
are they not ? 

Mr. Lauterbacii. No, sir. It is very important for us that we should make our 
freight charges as low as possible, in order to encourage commerce. 

The Chairman. If the universal custom of the world is that the freight charges 
shall include the manifest and certificates, you don’t suffer in comparison with other 
carriers ? 

1 4284. 2654 (ninth). 

2 Rules and Regulations National Board of Health, approved Nov. 14, 1881. Fees circular letter of 
department, dated .Tune 19, 1881. 

3 Stat. N. Y.. Diossy ed., vol. 1, p. 500, § 5, Fees. 

<U. S. Gov. Stat., 3988. 

* 1 Calf. Stat, 2965. 

6 U. S. Res. Stat., 4793. 4381, as to fees. 

7 U. S. Rev. Stat,, p. 896, sec. 4754. 

16 


067 



































































242 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Lauterbach. These things look small, but amount to a great deal in the ag- 


Is it perfectly solvent ? 


gregate. 

Mr. Cox. Does your company pay expenses 

Mr. Lauterbach. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cox. Does it pay anything beyond expenses ? 

Mr. Lauterbach. It has done sufficiently well to add to its naval armament and 
develop commerce in that way. We paid no dividends tor fifteen years. 

Mr. Cox. Are you much in debt? Do you owe anybody ? 

Mr. Lauterbach. No, we are not in debt, except the floating debt which every cor¬ 
poration has. We have paid some $2,000,000 within the last eighteen months for new 
ships. We have $21,000,000 in stocks and bonds. 

Mr. Cox. Why don’t you buy your skips abroad? 

Mr. Houston. Because we cannot use foreign vessels in our trade. We are obliged 
to bny American ships. The most valuable part of our trade is the coasting trade, and 
we cannot use foreign vessels in that trade. It would be very unjust, after forcing us 
to buy our ships in this country, to allow others to go abroad and bring cheaper ships 
to compete with us and run us off. 

Mr. Cox. Why would you not buy a ship abroad if it is cheaper ? 

Mr. Houston. Because we can’t use them. 

Mr. Cox. How many ships have you in the China line ? 

Mr. Houston. Two. 

Mr. Cox. Would you advise our people in Congress to repeal these navigation 
laws? 

Mr. Houston. No, sir. Taking the question altogether, ships purchased abroad are 
not cheaper than those built here. There must be ship-yards here to repair them, 
and these yards could not be sustained unless we have ships to build, which will then 
sustain dock-yards in which to repair them. 

Mr. Cox. Why would you not buy this ship abroad when it is cheaper? 

Mr. Houston. Because in reality they are not cheaper. 

Mr. Candler. Should you think it advantageous to buy ships abroad for the for¬ 
eign trade? 

Mr. Houston. No, sir. 

Mr. Candler. Would you think it a good plan to amend the navigation laws so 
that ships could be bought for the foreign trade ? 

Mr. Houston. I don’t think it would be just to put our money in foreign ships for 
home trade. 

Mr. Candler. Would it be any advantage for the government to make contracts 
with ships built in the United States for carrying the mails? 

Mr. Houston. It would be an advantage to the ship-builder and to us as at present 
constituted. I don’t care anything about subsidizing our line. We want to be free 
in making contracts with the Post-Office Department for carrying the mails or not as 
we please. 


Mr. Cox. Why can’t you buy ships at your pleasure where you can buy them cheap¬ 
est? Is there any restriction forbidding this? 

Mr. Houston. In the first place, you compelled us by law to buy these twenty ships 
we are operating now, and to build them at home. I think that ships abroad can be 
built from 10 to 15 per cent, less than here. We have put all this money in ships, and 
to allow somebody else to go abroad and buy ships and run them in cpmpetition with 
us would be very unjust. We are so hampered that we can’t go abroad and buy ships 
and use them. After building them, we don’t wish to invite opposition by repealing 
tin* laws under which we paid for these ships. 

Mr. Lauterbach. The pattern of the ship is placed where the ship is built, and 
from the pattern they must make the repairs. 

Mr Cox. Yes, sir; I know that. 

Mr. Candler. It was a disadvantage to you that you could not buy a ship abroad ? 

Mr. Lauterbach. Yes, sir; I think it was. 

Mr. Cox. Why does it not continue to be a disadvantage? 

Mr. Lauterbach. Because we have tonnage now sufficient to do our business, and 
we don’t want anybody to come alongside of us with a cheaper article- 

Mr. Candler. As a matter of policy you would advocate the purchase of ships, but 
having invested in ships under these disadvantageous laws, it would be injurious to 
you ? 

Mr. Houston. I consider it would be very bad policy for the Government of the 
United States or the people to attempt to carry on its commerce in foreign-built ships, 
for the reason that unless you buiid ships here, you would never be able to support 
repair-shops and foundries, to make repairs as are required to be made from time to 
time. Unless you have ships to build you cannot sustain your ship-yards; you cannot 
separate the two. 

Mr. Vest. Is it not a fact that Germany bought her iron steamships from Great 
Britain, and repaired them in her own yards ? 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


243 


Mr. Houston. I believe that is not entirely so ; but Germany is so near England it 
is easy tor her to repair her ships there. There were some large French steamers run - 
11 ing to the United States, built in England, and when they wanted to change the 
character of the ships they had them lengthened and sent them to England’s yards. 

Mr. Vest. Does Germany send her ships to England to have them repaired? 

Mr. Houston. Yes, sir, in a great measure. 

Mr. Miller. What’s your information in regard to the cost of English built ships ? 

Mr. Houston. I went over there fifteen or sixteen months ago, with authority to 
purchase ships. I found that the difference in price was about i’2 per cent. 

Mr. Cox. Would you favor a rebate on the materials composing a ship ? I want 
your better judgment on that. 

Mr. Houston. You are going into a great question there, Mr. Cox. 

Mr. Cox. Could our materials be utterly and thoroughly free, and would our ship¬ 
ping be revived if such were the case ? 

Mr. Houston. Yes, sir; I would like to see them all free. 

Mr. Cox. Would you favor that policy? Would you instruct your Congressman to 
vote for that? 

Mr. Houston. 1 think I would. 

Mr. Cox. What would be the difference between letting in the materials free and 
the finished ships? 

Mr Houston. It is a question of labor. 

Mr. Cox. And how much would that probably be ? 

Mr. Houston. I think there is about 90 per cent, difference between a finished ship 
and the raw material when it comes out of the ground. 

Mr. Cox. You would favor bringing in angles, bolts, sheetings, &.C., to put a ship 
together, simply asking that, labor might be cared for here. 

Mr. Houston. Yes, sir; as a purchaser. 

The Chairman. Would you think it good policy if our laws allowed you to bring in 
here, already manufactured, everything that constitutes a mercantile or naval equip¬ 
ment? You favor the policy of buying abroad and having built abroad the mercan¬ 
tile marine and naval ships of the United States ? 

Mr. Houston. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Would it be good policy for any government to provide itself with 
ships for the carrying trade ? 

Mr. Houston. I don’t think we ought to rely on anybody. We never will be able 
to build up our navy, merchant marine, or anything else, unless we have yards and 
skilled workmen here to do it. \ 

^lr. Candler. Do you favor taking stores for ships bound for foreign voyages out 
of bond ? 

Mr. Houston. Yes, sir; I favor everything of that kind. It is not very material to 
us at the present time, because we can get all our stores at foreign ports to which we 
run. It is not a material question to our company. 

Mr. Candler. Do you think it would be a better plan to abolish consular fees and 
pay our consuls salaries? 

Mr. Houston. I don’t know that it would. I think if you limited the fees in num¬ 
ber it might be well. It makes very little material difference to us, however. 

Mr. Candler. Are they not limited now ? 

Mr. Houston. No, sir; except in amount. 

Mr. Candler. You don’t think it would be better to have a regular salary paid to 
our consuls and have no fees at all? What is your opinion, as a business man? 

Mr. Houston. We have not suffered from irregularity in that respect. 

Mr. Cox. How long have you been president of this company? 

Mr. Houston. Three years. 

Mr. Cox. Who make up the directors? 

Mr. Houston. Mr. Gould, Mr. Sage, Mr. Dillon, Mr. Huntington, Mr. Hart, Mr. 
Lauterbach, Mr. Trenor, Mr. Park, Mr. Perkins, and myself. 

Mr. Cox. Are they in any way associated with the Pacific railroads in this business? 

Mr. Houston. Some are. Mr. Park, Mr. Lauterbach, Mr. Perkins, myself, and Mr. 
Hart are not. 

Mr. Cox. How much of this stock is owned by these various persons? 

Mr. Houston. Mr. Hart has about 40,000shares; Mr. Gould about 20,000; Mr. Sage 
about 30,000; Mr. Dillon some 2,000; I think I have between 8,000 and 9,000. I can¬ 
not giv* the names of all the stockholders. I have not seen the stock list in the last 
two or three months. Considerable stock is in the hands of people who do not give 
in their names at once. 

Mr Cox. Your steamship company is run in connection with railroads, more or 
less. What do you mean by connection ? 

Mr. Houston. Run with the same interest. In our business between New York 
and Central America and Mexican ports they have no interest whatever. 

Mr. Cox. The China tea trade is not connected with your company ? No contracts 
bet ween them ? 


244 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Houston. No, sir; not any. 

Mr. Cox. Has there been any between China and San Francisco ? 

Mr. Houston. None whatever. 

Mr. Cox. Has there been any since you have been president? 

Mr. Houston. No, sir. I suppose you refer to the contract for maintaining rates 
between here and San Francisco. 

Mr. Cox. Explain that, please. 

Mr. Houston. We simply have a contract to maintain rates, and charge the same 
for passengers and freights. 

Mr. Miller. This examination lias nothing to do with the matters under discussion. 

Mr. Cox. This is a company that came to Congress for subsidies- 

Mr. Houston (interrupting). No, sir; not at all. 

Mr. Cox. That was before Mr. Miller came to Congress. 

Mr. Vest. I understand you to say that you are opposed to the repeal of the navi¬ 
gation laws, and we ought to build our own vessels here ? That is the great neces¬ 
sity—building ships at home. We can compete in wooden vessels with the world. 
Now, do you think under our present navigation laws the building of iron vessels, by 
American builders, will increase? 

Mr. Houston. 1 think it is growing every day. 

Mr. Vest. Will you explain, then, to this committee why we built 33,000 tonsof iron 
steamships in 1874, and only 25,000 tons in 1880, according to the official table of the 
Treasury Department? 

Mr. Houston. 1 did not know that that was the case. 

Mr. Vest. In order to be entirely accurate I will refer you to the table. In 1874 we 
built 311,097 tons of iron steamships, and in 1880 only 23,931 tons. 

Mr. Houston. I do not think that statement is correct. It has been materially in¬ 
creased since 1872; for in that year we made a*contract to build two steamships of 
10,000 tons each, to be finished in a certain time, but after the ships were commenced 
it Ava.s found there were no rolling mills in this country that could roll beams of suffi¬ 
cient size for the vessel, and they delayed finishing the vessel until 1874, and these two 
ships aggregated within a fraction of 12,000 tons, and that is one-third of the tonnage 
put in your table, besides the whole merchant marine had to be rebuilt, and that re¬ 
quired a great increase at first; the rest has gone to swell the tonnange. 

Mr. Vest (reading). In 1875 it fell off to 21,632 tons; 1876,21,346; 1877, 5,927; 1878, 
26,000; 1&79, 22,000; and in 1880, 25,582. 

Mr. Houston. I think that is owing in great measure to the fact that our company 
had these wooden side-wheel boats, and were obliged to commence to build in 1872-’73. 
We built some eleven or t welve vessels, and that would enter largely into the amount 
of tonnage being built. 

The Chairman. Are these iron steam vessels that have been built since 1870 still in 
existence ? 

Mr. Houston. Yes, sir ; so far as I know, all but one or two. 

The Chairman. And all that have been built since that time are part of the iron 
marine service ? 

Mr. Houston. 1 cannot call to mind but two ships that have beeu built in that 
time that do not still exist. 

The Chairman. These quotations from the Treasury Department report are addi¬ 
tions to the iron marine vessels somewhere in service each year. 

Mr. Cox. Did you say that free ships would cause the destruction of American ship¬ 
yards ? 

Mr. Houston. No, sir; I did not say so. 

Mr. Cox. Did the introduction of free ships into Germany destroy the German ship¬ 
yards or not ? 

Mr. Houston. No, sir: it stimulated them to build and repair. I know that in 
large repairs they sent their ships to England very frequently, because they had no 
facilities for doing it in Germany. 

Mr. Cox. I understood you to say that free ships would injure your business, be¬ 
cause you would be unable to carry freight cheaper. 

Mr. Houston. I do not think I said so. 

Mr. Cox. It you bought your ships abroad, at the cheapest possible price, would it 
in time make cheaoer freights? Would the community be relieved to auy extent ? 

Mr. Houston. That is going into the whole question of free trade. I doubt whether 
that is the policy for our government to adopt. 

Mr. Cox. In your answers here, you look to your company’s interest and not to the 
community at large. 

Mr. Houston. I think that is but natural. 

Mr. Cox (to Mr. Lauterbach). Did you look at your books to see what your com¬ 
pany had paid to Congressmen ? 

Mr. Eauterbach. We have not paid anything. 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 245 


Receipts from United States Government for transportation mails , if ear ending December 31, 

1881. 

[As reported by the Post-Office Department at Washington.] 

NEW YORK. 


Receipts. Outward. Inward. 


Aspinwall. 

British packet agent. 

United States of Colombia 
United States consul. 

United States consul. 

British packet agent .. 


Panama.. 

United States of Colombia 
United States consul. 

United States consul. 

British packet agent. 


$12, 370 
17, 072 
15, 616 
258 

2, 550 
566 
24, 992 


200,946 
40,715 j 
74, 083 


75, 653 
25, 357 
163, 365 


Nicaragua, Greytown via Aspinwall 

Ecuador. 

Chili.j.. 

Peru . 

Honduras. r . 

Salvador. 

Guatemala.... 

Mexico, via Panama . 

Mexico, via Aspinwall, east coast ... 


9, 801 
852 


$45, 916 






$28,108 






315, 744 







264, 375 
400 

21, 998 
45, 282 
58, 072 
406 
18,182 
92, 927 


43, 330 


10,653 I 


Inward 

Outward 


339, 213 
614, 180 


Total 


953, 393 


Pacific Mail Steamship Company, 

New York, April 10, 1882. 


Receipts from United States Government for transportation mails, gear ending December 31, 

1881. 


[As reported by the Post-Olfice Department at Washington.] 
SAN FRANCISCO. 


Mexico. 


Guatemala. v . 

Salvador ....-. 

Honduras. 

Panama. 

United States of Colombia. 

United States consul and British packet agent. 

• United States consul and British packet agent. 
Panama. 


Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and British packet agent, Panama. 

Ecuador. 

Chili. r . 


Peru. 

Australia, Ac. 

China, Japan, &c^ 


Total 

Outward 


Total inward and outward. 


Receipts. | Outward. 


$800 29 
317 49 
91 02 
4 40 


Inward. 


$93 68 
40 67 
20 98 


155 33 


29 80 
111 96 


11 20 
11 02 |. 
43 71 . 
68 3 ^ 
10,653 16 
1,661 01 


$141 33 


141 76 
34 34 


160 04 
110 84 


588 31 
13,816 95 

14, 405 26 






































































































246 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


RECAPITULATION. 


New York, outward- 

New York, inward.... 
San Francisco, outward 
San Francisco, inward . 


Total postage, 1881 


614 80 
3, 392 13 



9, 533 93 


13, 816 95 
588 31 


14, 405 26 



23,939 1S» 




Pacific Mail Steamship Company, 

New York. April 10, 1882. 


Hon. Omar I). Conger, 

Chairman Joint Committee on Commerce: 


Dear Sir: The Pacific Mail Steamship Company desires— 

The abolition of the law requiring’ it to take the mail at rates as arbitrarily fixed 
by the present laws, and to that end desires that sections 3976, 3987, 4009, 4203, and 
4204 may be abolished; and that the routes of vessels engaged in foreign commerce 
be designated as postal routes, payment for service to be rendered to be made agree¬ 
ably to such equitable contract as the Postmaster-General and the carrier may enter 
into, similar to the provisions of law in respect to railroads, embodied in sections. 
3964 to 3970, inclusive, and sections 3997 to 4005, inclusive. 

The abolition of tonnage dues by abolishing sections 4219 and 4223 of the Revised 
Statutes. * 

The amendment of sections 4492 and 4593, and of the provisions contained at page 
896 of the Revised Statutes, so as to provide for the payment of fees to the United 
States commissioners by the government and not by the ship owner. 

The abolition of section 4582, providing for the payment of three months extra 


wages. 

The modification of section 4578 so as to increase the payment to be made for desti¬ 
tute seamen. 

The enactment of a law whereby vessels engaged in foreign commerce shall be sub¬ 
ject to be taken possession of by the United States Government upon an equitable 
payment to the owner, in time of war, and that all the vessels engaged in foreign 
commerce shall be exempt from the payment of all taxes, State, local, or municipal: 
the necessity for such a law will be apparent when it is remembered that the city and 
State taxes of the Pacific Mail Steamship Company have been upwards of $100,000 
per annum, and that though now exempt by statute, constant, efforts are being made 
to repeal the exemption. The amendment of section 4511 so as to cover this com¬ 
pany. Section 4513 does not remedy the matter. 

The fees paid to United States consuls for shipping and discharging crews agreeably 
to sections 4517,4580, and 4582 should also be abolished. 

Also to abolish the inspectors’ fees, under section 4458 ; clearance fees of vessels and 
cargo, sections 4197, 4381, 2654; entrance fees for vessels and cargo, sections 4381 and 
2624 ; night officers and inspectors’ fees, sections 5657 and 2871; fees of survey, port 
entry, and affidavit, section 4381 ; emigration fees such as those prescribed by the 
California statutes; health officers’ fees; medical inspection fees, especially those 
under the law creating the National Board of Health, chapter 202 of the laws of 1879, 
and Regulations of the Board of Health approved November 14, 1881; board wardens" 
survey fees, such as those fixed by the New York statutes ; carting of mails, United 
States Revised Statutes, 3988; quarantine permits, sections 4793 and 4381 of the Re¬ 
vised Statutes; shipping articles and crew list, section 4574, and page 896. 

Very, truly yours, 


J. B. HOUSTON, 

President Pacific Mail Steamship Company ~ 


STATEMENT OF LIEUT. J. 1). J. KELLEY. • 

Lieut. J. D. J. Kelley appeared before the committee and stated he represented 95 
per cent, of the interest of the United States naval officers, and in that, interest he de¬ 
sired to file the following statement: 

To the honorable committee inquiring into the decline of American shipping: 

Connected intimately with the question of the decline of American shipping is the 
necessity of providing capable officers and men for the management of the ships we 























AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


217 


p opose to own. Ships without effective crews cannot compete successful]v for tiade 
m an a S e when commercial success is tlie price of unceasing vigilance. When it is 
remembered that an error of judgment or a want of information upon a simple matter 
may, m some cases, nay, has in many, led to the sacrifice of hundreds of lives, or that 
a single ship built may represent .$2,500,000, it becomes a duty both of the government 
and ot ship owners to find the best men capable for such enormous responsibilities. 
Jn snore, where a thousand unforeseen circumstances do not complicate the question 
a l>eison intrusted with an enterprise of equal pecuniary magnitude would be required 
to tarnish most crucial tests of his fitness for the business on hand, and no companv 
nor legislative body would be acquitted of blame which failed to take the precautions 
that promised reasonable security to invested capital and absolute safety to human 


Abroad the subject has received the closest attention, while we have done nothin**- 
and one great result is that to-day tlfe efficiency of the British seamen has been so 
much improved that where ten years since the average of tons carried by each seaman 
was only 278 while to-day it is 436, or in the ratio of the labor of two men in 18811 
equaling that of three in 1870. 

In 1880 the number of men employed in English merchant ships was 200,000, 120.000 
in sailing vessels, and 80,000 in steamers, and of these the annual waste reached 16.000. 

Pl ace this loss was a paramount duty of government. From an examination of 
lo,828 English and 1,367 American casualties, it was found that for the total number 
ot wrecks, excluding collisions, 45 per cent, w-as due to preventable causes, and in 
l,~b/ trials there were but 504 clear acquittals. Including with these the class of 
wrecks for which no cause can be safely assigned, and that involving vessels which 
were never heard from after sailing, the general conclusion is reached that about one- 
half of all the Avrecks which occur are due to preventable causes. The first duty of a 
sailor is evidently to take care of his ship, to navigate her upon the high seas with 
safety, and to make his port of destination ; yet to-day it is a matter of record that 
one-half of the wrecks are due to preventable causes, and two thirds of the wreckages 
are the results of ignorance and incompetency. If this be true under a system which 
demands from masters and mates the possession of certain elements of fitness, it w r ould 
be natural to deduce that in a country where no specially tested qualifications are 
required, more disasters Avould occur—otherwise, training and education go for noth¬ 
ing. Statistics prove this. 

The ordinary life of a ship, allowing for extraordinary circumstances, is, in the 
United States, 18 years; in France, 20; in Holland, 25; in Germany, 25; in Great 
Britain, 26 ; in Italy 28 ; and in Norway, 30. 

The annual average of wrecks for the seven years ending 1879, is as follows : 


Country. 


British. 

French .. 

United States. 

Dutch. 

German. 

Italian. 

Scandinavian . 


Steamers. 

Sailing vessels. 


3. 93 


4. 04 

4. 06 

5. 48 

3.84 

4.49 


4 04 


2. 94 


3. 20 


This total of percentage shows— 

United States. 

Dutch. 

British.. 

German. 

French . 

Scandinavian. 

Italian. 



This disproves the assertion so often made that the relative loss of steamers is 
greater than that of sailing vessels, and makes apparent that our loss is greatest; a 
third more than England and double that of Italy. 

Over one-half of these wrecks occurred when the wind blew less than a fresh gale, 
when any ship properly manned, found, and navigated, could keep the seas in safety. 
The loss of ships is greater for new vessels than for old—the greatest wreckage being 
between the twenty-first and thirtieth year of the ship’s age. 

The remedy for all this is the enactment of a general law similar to the merchant 
shipping act of England, which Avill bring the care of seamen directly under the gen¬ 
eral government, and require a rigorous examination of the officers entrusted with such 
ships, certificates to be issued to them both for competency and service, and no ship 



























248 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


allowed to leave any port of the United States unless the officers or captain of them 
ha ve such guarantees of their capacity. In England the grades for which examination 
must be passed are only second and first mate, master and extra master in foreign- 
going ships, mate and master in home-trade ships, and first and second class engineers 
in all steamers, with a voluntary examination in steam for all masters and mates. 
France, Italy, Great Britain- Russia, and the North countries rejoice in a plan of some 
sort, but so far as our necessities demand and to the degree that practice can justify 
theory, England of all nations appears to have secured what we should essay. Between 
the rigorous lines which government demands in France for the conduct of every en¬ 
terprise, and our own untrammeled liberty of neglect, there must be a golden mean. 

Looked at broadly, all these English examinations serve, so far as any examination 
can, to prove an officer’s fitness for the grade to which he aspnes. It is claimed that 
they are loosely conducted, and that many incapable candidates pass, owing to the 
carelessness, venality, or over-indulgence of the examiners, but from the character of 
the men selected for this last duty it may be safely argued that the number of appli¬ 
cants who slip through is small. 

WHAT WE HAVE TO EXPECT. 

What then are we to expect when we have no tests, and it rests only with the ship¬ 
owner to determine who shall be intrusted with property of' which his share may be 
the smallest part? In England they are striving every day to advance the scheme of 
examinations, and to eradicate faults which they claim arise more from Ihe lowness 
of the standard than from any other pregnant cause. It certainly would add to the 
efficiency of the merchant marine aud increase the prestige of its officers if a broader 
examination were required. Not only should it be made to include the highest sea¬ 
manship and all practical navigation, but, according to Brassev, at least one foreign 
language aud the elements of a commercial education. If a moderate annual stipend 
were given to those who passed an examination iu gunnery the officers would be en¬ 
couraged to prepare themselves in peace for the duties war might require. With us 
especially would all these tests be necessary. Our Navy at the best is a skeleton upon 
which we must build with the material drawn from the merchant marine a unified per¬ 
sonality that would aid us in asserting every right that external violence or greed 
might assail. The higher examinations would tend to secure more uniform excellence, 
for even now, under existing rules, the captains of the largest ships are unequal in 
character aud skill. It is not necessary that this proposed extension of the scope should 
be in the line of abstruse mathematics; but naval architecture, modern languages, 
and commercial knowledge, whether relating to law, foreign exchange, or general trade, 
would scarcely be less useful than the mathematical theory of navigation. 

The Norwegian Government has endeavored to assimilate the condition of the naval 
and mercantile services, and has made intellectual attainments obligatory upon the 
merchant masters. The results have been to form a sober and intelligent class that 
has secured the admiration and respect of the maritime peoples. It is not unfrequent 
that naval lieutenants obtain permission to command merchantmen, and public policy 
there, as it should everywhere, dictates that masters and mates should be men of edu¬ 
cation and special training, qualified for useful and brilliant service to their country 
in time of need. Here, then, abroad we see a system, as in England, founded upon 
principles of equity, justice, and use, suited to our necessities and not antagonistic to 
our national genius and instinct; a plan so practical that no individual effort is ham¬ 
pered, and yet so theqj-etical that the mere man of straw, whose fitness resrs only upon 
what his experience of facts may reach, and not upon what his grasp of principles may 
assert, is sure to-^^swi level where his possibilities for harm are reduced to a mini¬ 
mum. WeTiA with safety, for it grew out of those same necessities of the 

modern spirit £ affect our civilization, and it is based upon intelligence and edu¬ 
cation ; its sucCe&t justifies its existence audits progress gives surety of its perma¬ 
nence. fortified by the f'M’bw ledge of the good it has effected in England we can urge 
its adoption here, and as we must begin at a beginning that is not as yet, and fight 
our way up to the point already attained by nations who lack those maritime activi¬ 
ties so essential to commercial supremacy which we possess, it is our duty and should 
be our pride to anticipate in our present the demands of a future that'ean be made 
glorious for our merchant marine. 

J. 1). J. KELLEY, 
Lieutenant , United States Navy. 

Mr. Candler (to Lieutenant Kelley). What do you think of having naval officers 
act as consuls ? 

Lieutenant Kelley. They would make very good consuls—retired naval officers 
would be very competent to fulfil the duties of consuls. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


24 9 


STATEMENT OF CORNELIUS M. WITSCH. 

*' 

Cornelius M. Witsch, a seaman, of the bark Laura Burnham, of Boston, spoke in 
behalf of the sailor, and advocated the abolition of extra pay to sailors. He thought, 
that naval officers could be utilized for consuls to great advantage. He stated that 
American officers in the merchant marine were not exactly what they ought to be. 
Some nations discriminated against American vessels, especially Spain, in behalf of 
their own country. He advocated the abolition of advance pay, and thought that 
a vessel bringing a sailor home should receive compensation therefor. 

Mr. Vest, at 1.30 p. m., moved to take a recess until 2 o’clock, which was adopted. 

The committee resumed its session at 2 p. m. Present, the Chairman, Mr. Miller, 
Mr. Vest, Mr. Candler, and Mr. Dingley. 

It 

Mr. Edward Hincken, of the firm of Boyd & Hincken, New York City, was the 
last witness examined. He said : 


STATEMENT OF MR. EDWARD HINCKEN. 

I understand the object of the committee is to ascertain what will benefit the ship - 
ping of the United States. My remedy can be summed up in very few words. It 
is, “ free ships.” Let us buy our ships in thecheapest market. Other nationsbuy their 
ships in open market, anywhere; we are held down to our own flag. Many years ago 
this was the police of all nations. Our act of May, 1828, gave life to all other nations 
becasue it allowed them to come here and trade with us under our reciprocity treaties, 
and I don’t see any remedy for us now unless we are allowed to buy our ships as they 
do. Our carrying trade is being done by foreign ships, and the owners of these ships 
are reaping the benefit of our commerce. As for the collateral causes for the destruc¬ 
tion of our commerce, the consular fees, the wages system, &c., I do not think they 
amount to a picayune ; but you will never revive our American commerce until we are 
put on the same footing as other nations. 

The Chairman. You mean by commerce the carrying trade? 

Mr. Hincken. Yes, sir: the foreign commerce of the country. 

The Chairman. You don’t mean that American commerce has declined any the last 
two or three years ? 

Mr. Hincken. No, sir. 

The Chairman. You mean the carrying trade? 

Mr. Hincken. No, sir. In 1880 we sent to Sweden and Norway 221 vessels. There 
were two vessels loaded back from Norway, or about 740 tons, with products for the 
United States. 

Mr. Miller. Are not nearly all of the ships allotted to the Noru ay and Sweden trade 
in our commerce sailing vessels? 

Mr. Hincken. Yes, sir; only eight were steamers. 

Mr. Miller. How many altogether came here? 

Mr. Hincken. There were about 2,154 clearances. The exports from this country 
to Norway and Sweden amounted to $2,147,252, and the imports from there to $213,934, 
making the total commerce of that country $2,361,176. It ranks as No. 30. Italy is a 
little better than that, ranking 25. For the sake of our sharing in this paltry tonnage 
we get one-fifth of one per cent, of this three millions of commerce. 

The Chairman. Your remedy for the discrepancy between American ships and 
those of Norway and Sweden is iron free ships ? 

Mr. Hincken. Yes, sir. - 

The Chairman. It has been stated here that we can build and are building sailing 
wooden vessels as cheaply as elsewhere, and nearly all this trade with Norway is 
done in wooden sailing vessels. How would this interfere with the trade, and how 
would it help us ? 

Mr. Hincken. There is not trade enough in Sweden and Norway to be affected 
by it. . 

The Chairman. I fail to see how free ships would change the condition of affairs 
as to the commerce carried on in Sweden. 

Mr. Hincken. No, not there. They have no commerce. 

Mr. Miller. There is a large amount of trade carried on between the United States 
and foreign ports done in Swedish vessels, and these are sailing vessels. Your remedy 
is free ships. So far as sailing vessels are concerned we do not need them, because 
we can build them more cheaply than they can. 

Mr. Hincken. We have a reciprocity treaty with Sweden, but no commerce. They 
can go and get their ships anywhere, while we cannot. 

The Chairman. Is it not a fact that every Norwegian vessel is built in Norway? 



250 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Mr. Hincken No, sir. We are letting two or three Norwegians build in the United 
States to-day. 

The Chairman. Are they not a great ship-building people? Do not they build tor 
their own use, as well as to sell abroad? 

Mr. Hinckkn. Not much to sell abroad; they build a great many for their own use,, 
however. 

Mr. Miller. Suppose we were to repeal the shipping law and have free ships, 
where would we go to buy wooden sailing vessels which would compete with Sweden 
and Norway to-day? Wouldn’t she make them herself? Would you fear any com¬ 
petition of wooden ships? 

Mr. Hincken. Theory and practice are two different things. 

Mr. Miller. Suppose we passed an act making free ships, how would this affect the 
trade carried on to-day in Swedish vessels between the United States and Europe ? 

Mr. Hinckkn. The days of wooden ships are numbered. Iron and steam are going 
to do the business. They can doit cheaper; they will make four voyages while the 
Maine wooden ship makes one; the Maine ship will carry 14 per cent., and they will 
carry one-third more. They will sail with the same number of men, and burn thirteen 
or fourteen tons of coal a day. 

Mr. Dingley. Isn’t more than half of our foreign carrying trade done in sailing 
vessels ? 

Mr. Hinckkn. 1 should think it was about equally divided. 

Mr. Dingley. If over one-half of our foreign carrying trade is in sailing vessels, 
and if two-thirds of our sailing vessels are wooden vessels, and the latter can be built as 
cheaply in this country, quality for quality, as anywhere else in the world, how does- 
it happen that we cannot compete with other nations ? 

Mr. Hinckkn. Because the foreigners build their vessels cheaper than we can. Our 
own ships are sailed for great deal less than they were in the days of our prosperity. 

Mr. Dingley. Is there not a great deal of difficulty beyond the first cost of the ship 
in running it? 

Mr. Hincken. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Miller. Free ships wouldn’t help the amount of tonnage now carried in sailing" 
vessels. 

Mr. Hincken. The changes all accumulate, but they are not the sole reason why 
our flag is dead. Competition has brought ship owning down so low that it doesn’t 
pay. Turning capital into the foreign trade in this country would be a very slow pro¬ 
cess. On the breaking out of the war we had several causes to augment our tonnage, 
and we could not build tonnage enough to supply the world. The famine in Ireland, 
the Mexican war, the Crimean war, all made a great demand for ships. We went on 
building, and when the war came on it found us with a large stock of tonnage. I 
consider that it was a blessing to us that foreigners were anxious to buy our ships. 
The ship-owners sold out for hi£h prices, and we have never seen sufficient induce¬ 
ment to replace that tonnage. 

Mr. Miller. Isn’t, it one of the present troubles in the reviving of the shipping' 
trade, that the great shipping houses and merchants interested in the foreign trade 
have turned their attention to internal commerce and put their capital into other in¬ 
dustries, and find it more comfortable and profitable to keep it there? Capital goes 
where it can make the most profit. 

Mr. Hincken. That’s it, exactly; that’s the solution of the question. 

Mr. Miller. Until the rate of profit comes down, it won’t do to go into shipbuilding?" 

Mr. Hincken. Yes, sir ; ’tis a question of profit and loss, until you give us a chance 
to try what we can do under free ships, or else the question will never be settled. 
Let us buy our steamers where we can get them cheapest, and if we cannot compete 
with foreigners, there’s an end to our commerce. 

The Chairman. From a personal observation of running ships you don’t think it 
would be profitable now? 

Mr. Hincken. No, sir. There is another view, however, which must not be over¬ 
looked—the difference to the country in the interest they would receive on the capi¬ 
tal invested in ships and the employment of American seamen. The outfits would be 
paid for here, and every manufacture and every citizen would be benefited. If for¬ 
eigners are to do the carrying, their ships are fitted out on the other side; interest on 
the capital goes in their own pockets, we furnishing them beef, pork, and a barrel or 
two of flour, because it ischeaper for them. If ships were owned by Americans there 
would be a reserve of American seamen, should the Navy ever want them. We are 
now making no American seamen. I don’t think the question is limited to whether 
the ship-owners can make money. It is limited to this: If free ships would augment 
the number of American ships, it. would add to the wealth of the country. They 
would have American capital; their interests would be here; they would be sailed by 
American seamen ; they would get their outfits here, and foreigners would not receive 
all these advantages as they do now. 

The Chairman. You would pay out the whole first cost of the ships to go to Europe, 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 251 

l>ut. would try and work it in some way to reserve for Americans the incidental profits 
of the carrying business. 

Mr. Hincken. Idle first cost of a ship does not amount to much. 

The Chairman. Then wouldn’t you pay it to your own country to build them ? 

Mr. Hincken. For the good of the commerce of the state or nation’t is better, even 
it we don’t get a cent of interest, for we would keep that tonnage afloat. 

The Chairman. You have been looking to the considerations of the public welfare; 
isn’t it better for the public welfare if we should pay the money we spend for ships to 
our own citizens and support our own people ? 

Mr. Hincken. Everything is labor. Say our builder here would make $10,000 on a 
ship costing $70,000. That ship runs ten or twelve years. There are her earnings. 
Every time she goes to sea, there is her outfit to benefit the country she comes from, 
instead of fitting out on the other side. Two-thirds of our crew must be American 
citizens. 

The Chairman. The testimony is that only one out of five is an American citizen. 
How would you benefit us by aiding more ships? 

Mr. Hincken. It would certainly increase the number of seamen, though, of cour-e, 
it would be small. It would be one-fifth increased. If we ever saw daylight, which 
we do not now, so far as owning a ship or building a ship is concerned, the profit 
on the first cost would be nothing to the country compared to the benefit which the 
country would derive from sailing the ship. 

The Chairman. You say a ship costs $75,000, and sails from New York provisioned 
here. Suppose you buy in the port of New York a foreign vessel that, costs $70,000' 
and she is provisioned here; you have thus paid $70,000 to go out'of the country. 
She is provisioned in the harbor here and also in the harbor where she goes. 

Mr. Hincken. A ship is generally provisioned where she is owned. It is the own¬ 
ing .and keeping the ships here that I look to the advantages we overcome paying out 
the capital. 

The Chairman. It seenys to me that paying $70,000 for our own labors, and that 
going mostly into provisions and materials for the support of those labors, encourages 
not only the industry of ship-building, but all others engaged in furnishing material 
for their support. It makes home consumption in all ways, but, your theory takes 
$70,000 to a foreign country to pay them what you would pay for labor. 

Mr. Hincken. Yes, sir; but if we owned the ship the profits of that ship would 
come back to us in the shape of earnings and in other ways. In running a ship of 
1,000 tons you have spent more than the first cost of the ship. 

The Chairman. Suppose she runs to England? 

Mr. Hincken. If she runs to England she ought to make three voyages a year. She 
would be here three times to replenish her stores, &c. 

The Chairman. Is there much profit in the carrying trade? 

Mr. Hincken. If I had given all my ships away fifteeii years ago I would have been 
better off than I am to-day. 

The Chairman. Is there much profit in the carrying trade after paying interest and 
insurance ? 

Mr. Hincken. There is hardly a profit of 5 per cent. That is the reason why men 
don’t buy ships. 

The Chairman. Transportation by long voyages is made cheapest in sailing vessels,, 
is it not ? 

Mr. Hincken. Y<*s, sir; it is now, and will continue to be. If our steamers couid 
coal as cheaply on the Pacific as at Norfolk or Sydney, the San Francisco trade would 
lie done by steam instead of sail. 

The following written statements were submitted to the committee at the adjourn¬ 
ment of its session in New York, November 21 : 

AMERICAN SHIPPING. 

The following letter upon the revival of the shipping interest of the United States- 
was addressed to the New York Chamber of Commerce by Mr. Renwick, of Milburn : 

* No. 19 Park Place, New York, January 7, 1882. 

James M. Brown, Esq., 

President New York Chamber of Commerce : 

Dear Sir: Asa committee of the Chamber of Commerce has presented various 
recommendations having reference to the shipping interest, which are to be discussed 
on Monday, the 16th, I beg leave to address you on the subject. 

The tenth recommendation proposed by the committee is as follows : 

“ That all foreign materials of every kind and character entering into the construc¬ 
tion and repair of vessels lie made duty free.” 


252 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


1 submit that the passage by Congress of a law to that effect would work incalcula¬ 
ble injury to many vested interests, and would practically destroy the iron and steel 
manufacture of the United States, because the materials used in shipbuilding are use¬ 
ful also in a great variety of other industries ; and if the duties should be wholly re¬ 
moved, as proposed, the materials would be imported free of duty, not only tor ship¬ 
building but for every other purpose for which they are useful. The iron and steel in¬ 
terest. and the vast existing interests in iron mines, would then be destroyed, because 
it is a notorious fact that with the present difference between the wages paid to artisans 
abroad and those paid here, not a pound of iron or of steel could be manufactured in 
this country if, as proposed in the tenth recommendation, these materials could be 
imported duty free. 

There is, however, a simple way in which the shipping interest in the United States 
could be revived, not only without affecting injuriously any existing interest, but with 
great advantage to all that may be directly or indirectly concerned in such a business. 
In the first place, it must be remembered that the navigation laws of the United 
States absolutely prohibit the employment of foreign-built vessels in the coasting 
trade. Hence, the builders of vessels and machinery now enjoy a monopoly of that 
business for the coasting trade, and no legislation whatever could increase that busi¬ 
ness, because its proportions are controlled only by the exigencies of domestic com¬ 
merce, and are as great now as the trade requires. Hence, to admit materials free of 
duty for t he building of vessels and machinery for the coasting trade would not only 
fail to increase that business, but would deprive American manufacturers of such ma¬ 
terials, of the profits they now make upon them. 

As respects vessels for traffic between a foreign country and the United States and 
vessels built for sale to foreign countries, the case is wholly different. At present no 
such vessels are built and no profit is derived from the manufacture and sale of ma¬ 
terials for such an industry Hence legislation which would render it. possible to 
create the business of building such vessels, without affecting the present business of 
building vessels for the coasting trade, would not affect injuriously any existing manu¬ 
facturers, but would materially benefit them, as there are many portions of the fit¬ 
tings of a ship, such as the joiner-work, the cabin-fittings, and the ornamental brass- 
work, which can be manufactured in this country with the aid of labor-saving ma¬ 
chinery at quite as low a cost as they can be abroad, and if such vessels were built 
here American manufacturers and mechanics would reap the whole profits of this 
work. 

The legislation that is required to produce the desired result is a law to the effect 
that vessels and machinery built for sale to citizens or governments of f reign coun¬ 
tries, and for the traffic solely between a port in the United States and a port in a 
foreign country may be built in bonded ship-yards of foreign materials imported free of 
duty, and a law having such effect, should be substituted for the tenth recommenda¬ 
tion of the committee of the chamber of commerce. 

The law should of course be supplemented by a clause to the effect that all imported 
materials and articles taken from the bonded ship-yards for domestic consumption 
should pay the same duties as if imported for other purposes. This clause would per¬ 
mit scrap-iron and scrap-steel, produced in cuttiug and shaping the work, to be 
reworked for domestic use. 

There should also be an additional supplement, which, in case of war or of an 
extraordinary exigency, would permit ships built in bonded ship-yards to be used 
for domestic transportation, but would prohibit such use in other cases. A supple¬ 
ment that would have this result would be a clause to the effect that whenever a ves¬ 
sel built in a bonded ship-yard should be used to carry freight or passengers between 
two ports in the United States, the vessel should lx 1 liable for a duty upon it somewhat 
higher than the aggregate duties that would be payable upon the same amount of 
materials as would be required for the building of such a vessel. An easy mode of 
computing such duties would be to make the amount payable according to the tons 
measurement of the vessel. Thus, the duty upon an exclusively sailing vessel might 
be $25 per ton for each ton’s burden of the vessel, carpenter’s measurement ; while 
the duty upon a vessel fitted with steam-propelling machinery might be ,$50 per ton 
for each ton’s burden, carpenter’s measurement; the duty in the latter case being 
higher than in the case of a sailing-vessel so as to correspond with the duties upon the 
materials used in the construction of the propelling machinery as well as the hull of 
the vessel. 

The passage of laws to the above effect would create a new industry in this country, 
and would give employment to a large number of mechanics and laborers. The manu¬ 
facturers of steel and iron in the United States could have no reasonable objection to 
such laws, because they would not take away or interfere with any business which 
those manufacturers now have ; while the laws would probably benefit them, as there 
would frequently be a want in bonded ship-yards of some shape of material for im¬ 
mediate use in the construction of a vessel, and it would pay the ship-builder better 
to get such an article at once from an American manufacturer or dealer than to suffer 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


253 


the delay of several weeks required to procure it from abroad. On the other hand, all 
the trades working in wood, and several of those working in metals, as well as the me¬ 
chanics and laborers employed in building- the hulls and machinery, would be im¬ 
mensely benefited by the demand resulting from the new industry; capital would 
have a new and profitable otitlet, and the United States, with the unrivaled skill of 
her mechanics, and their ingenuity in the construction of labor-saving machinery, 
would speedily become the rival of Great Britain in building steel and iron ships for 
the commerce of the world. 

Respectfully yours, 

E. S. REN WICK, 
Mechanical Engineer and Expert. 


Boston, October 5, 1882. 

Hon. John W. Candler, M. C.: 

Dear Sir : I herewith submit a statement from my friend, Capt. James W. Norcross, 
an old-experienced shipmaster and shipowner, giving his views upon the questions 
asked by your committee, which please receive for what it is worth, and place it where 
you deem best, and oblige. 

Yours, truly, 

R. G. F. C AND AGE. 


STATEMENT OF CAPT. 


.1 AMES W. NORCROSS. 


Gentlemen of the Commission on American Shipping: I have thought it better 
to embody the answer to your questions in a general statement, it being more com¬ 
prehensive than detail, and by this method each will be brought forward in regular 
order as it relates to tUe subject at issue. 

To the question of what has caused the decline in our mercantile marine there can 
be but one answer, viz, steam. This comparatively new factor in ocean navigation 
has affected nearly all maritime nations alike in their sailing tonnage, and we find 
that the sailing tonnage of Great Britain has decreased about 2,000,000 (which is 
almost the loss sustained in our own), but in the first case steam has taken its place, 
America has now and will continue to reproduce all the sailing vessels we have any 
use for. Our coasting tonnage has actually increased. No complaint comes from 
this arm of our marine, for Tis securely sheltered by our laws, which forbid the for¬ 
eigner to intrude his cheaper built and cheaper sailed vessel. It is the largest interest 
in our carrying trade, and employs vessels from the stately ship to the river sloop, and 
from the great ocean steamer to the stern-wheel scow for shallow streams and bayous. 
Such being the case, the whole weight of this inquiry becomes a question of steam 
navigation in foreign trade. And if the honorable Commission asks for reasons why 
America to-day virtually has no such marine, the reply must be that our government 
has persistently refused to follow the course of other nations in granting the aid neces¬ 
sary for its development, and until some better ideas prevail, of what is true political 
economy, than those which for the last thirty years have been applied to this question. I, 
for one, despair of ever seeing the American flag dying from the staff of American steam¬ 
ships in full successful competition with those of foreign nations. All look with com¬ 
placency on the expenditure of millions on millions to render navigable Western rivers 
and build up levees to protect the farmers on their banks, to construct highways and, 
indirectly, the subsidizing of railroads by grants of public lands. 

No one grumbles or complains of this expenditure, given to aid the development of 
our vast agricultural regions and to furnish the producers a highway and means of 
transportation to our own and the markets of the world. No one doubts or will say 
but that the money is well spent, and in no part of the country have these meas¬ 
ures received a more steady support than in our maritime cities and States. More, 
the bulk of the capital to build the roads has come from the same sources, thereby 
aiding to build up and enrich the West. But when the condition of our mercantile 
marine is brought into notice, perishing from sheer neglect and harrassing disabili¬ 
ties, asking for aid, without which it will surely die, ’tis then, I am sorry to say, the 
Western members of Congress who have heretofore been found almost unanimous in 
opposition and loudest in the cry of no subsidy. I do not hesitate to say the West owes 
much of its unparalleled prosperity to the good-will and active co-operation of the 
East. A few years ago, so valueless were far Western crops that ’twas common to fat¬ 
ten the stock by turning it into cornfields, and the product was often used for fuel. 
In 1846 1 purchased the cargo of a fiatboat from a Western farmer. This man had 
raised the corn, built his boat, in which he had 11 ated his produce to New Orleans— 
a voyage of two months—and the boat would bring from $20 to $25, to be broken up 
for tire-wood. I asked him the question, how he could live and sell his corn for 60 
cents a bushel ? He told me that when he or his neighbors could get 10 cents a bushel 



254 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


for their corn on the banks of the river they thought themselves fortunate indeed, - 
for if they sent to market the freight alone was 60 cents. 

All this is reversed. The farmer gets 60 cents at his own door, whilst transporta¬ 
tion costs but 10 ora little more, which he once thought a good return for his labor. 

If through the liberal aid from government and good will of the Eastern seaboard so 
much has been accomplished, surely such benefits deserve a better return than a stub¬ 
born resistance to the only means by which this decaying Eastern interest, the mer¬ 
cantile marine, can be again wrested from the subsidized foreigner. 

I do not wish to be understood as advocating direct subsidies, for the time has gone 
by when an ocean steamer could not be made self-supporting, and a subsidy was the 
life-blood on which her very existence depended. The substitution of iron for wood, 
with improvement in model and machinery, has effected such a saving in fuel and 
space that ordinary cargo steamers have been enabled to drive oft sailing vessels 
everywhere except the long voyages around the Cape of Good Hope and Cape Horn. 
Cost of construction and expense of sailing have hitherto prevented American capital 
from entering into competition, and the 1 > 11 1 k ot our carrying trade is in the hands of 
foreign ship-owners, chiefly British. Before I proceed to give my ideas on the methods 
to be employed to revive our lost ocean steam navigation, I must first fully answer 
the question of the causes that have led to its decline. No doubt all here are ac¬ 
quainted with the first experiments for navigating the Atlantic by steam, the success 
of those experiments, also the conception and establishment of the first English line 
of mail steamers. Previous to this the packet service and most of the carrying trade 
between the ports of Europe and the United States was in the hands ot American 
merchants. New York, the great center of commerce, owned and supported several 
lines of powerful sailing packet ships, and was the first to feel this new competition 
in the gradual absorption of mails, passengers, and choice freight by the heavily sub¬ 
sidized Cunard line. 

The regularity with which the steamers of that liue performed their trips solved 
the problem long considered doubtful, and it was not difficult to see that steam would 
be the future means of communication, particularly for the mail and packet service, 
and the citizens of that city took the initiative American ocean steam navigation by 
building the Collins line of steamships. Some aid from government was obtained, 
but altogether inadequate, and for some reason, and the wisdom of which l could 
never understand, this was first reduced, and by an act of Congress finally withdra wn 
altogether. After a few voyages and heavy loss the whole thing collapsed, a disas¬ 
trous failure. Boston merchants built two fine vessels; one of them made two voy¬ 
ages, and as no aid could be procured this too met the same fate as the Collins line, 
and from that day tothisthebuilding, owning, and sailing American ocean steam vessels 
has been an impossibility. Before I proceed to show the effect on our sailing marine 
by the substitution of steam it may be well to make some remarks on the high state 
of prosperity of our merchant marine and its rapid increase in the two decades from 
1840 to i860. A free-trade advocate before the tariff commission used this increase to 
illustrate and support his position, but he forgot or neglected to mention that a low 
tariff, excessive imports, and corresponding depression in home manufactures brought 
about the panic of 1857. 

Our navigation laws under which ships are built and owned have been in no way 
changed, and the gentleman was only guessing at a matter he evidently knew nothing 
about. The tariff in the first decade had been gradually lowered, again raised on ac¬ 
count of Mexican war, and again reduced in the last with result as mentioned. The 
old expensive side-wheel steamer did not materially interfere with ordinary freight 
and emigrant vessels, and the great increase in American tonnage was due to an 
eventful period. First in order comes the Irish famine that brought millions of that 
peop!e to our shores, and many ships of before unknown magnitude were added to 
the old packet lines; next, the Mexican war gave employment to numerous transports, 
and the acquisition of California, with the subsequent discovery of gold, taxed our 
shipyards to their utmost capacity to supply the famous clipper ship for the rush to 
the new Eldorado. This was soon followed by the same discovery in Australia, and 
the ports of Great Britain were crowded with American ships chartered to accommo¬ 
date the rush in that direction, and our builders received large orders from English 
firms. The Crimean, which took place in the first, and China war in the latter de¬ 
cade both also gave employment to many American ships. These ape the episodes 
which brought so much new tonnage into existence, with which our tariff had no 
more t<> do than the man in the moon. I turn from this great prosperity with regret 
to the darker side, and will endeavor to show how steam has gradually enabled the 
foreign owner to absorb our carrying trade, and show the loss we as a nation have 
sustained in the decay of au interest whose earnings so compensated for a balance of 
trade constantly against us, that at the outbreak of our civil war America did not 
owe the world a dollar, and exchange had fallen so low that captains found it more 
profitable to bring their freight money home in their own ships. These are facts in 
my experience that have come under my own observation and no guess-work. Unob- 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


255 


servant persons attribute the decline in our mercantile marine to the unfortunate 
war ot the rebellion. This is a mistake ; the causes existed, and the war helped to 
consummate what was already begun. The decline was rapid during the war, and the 
exceptional prosperity of former years was a factor in helping it on. Our merchants 
left with an immense tonnage on their hands, were unemployed or, if employed, sub¬ 
ject to war premiums that absorbed all and even more than the earnings, and they 
were, many of them, obliged to sell their vessels for what they could get, or place them 
under a foreign dag. 

But I must go back to look for the cause, which will be found in steam. During 
the time that American shipping was so prosperous, England was not idle. The ad¬ 
vent ot the Collins line had sent the Cunard company to their government for an 
increase ot subsidy in order to build larger and faster ships, and obtained the asked 
lor aid, and when the support was withdrawn from the American line orders that 
were given for the larger vessels were at once canceled. When England abandoned 
her restrictive system, and offered us her coasting trade, that employs a few colliers 
and drogers, in return tor ours, iron for shipbuilding in that country was an estab¬ 
lished fact, and the less expensive screw (already largely adopted by naval vessels as 
an auxiliary) was fast taking the place of the old expensive paddle-wheel. The high 
rates paid to steamers for transport service set every ship yard in Great Britain 
toward turning out screw steamers, and an association of Liverpool merchants bought 
several, which, being well adapted to carrying emigrants and cargo, were put in the 
New York trade, and, proving profitable, other lines started up with a cheap descrip¬ 
tion of vessels of moderate power, and it was but a few years before the old sailing 
packet ships were entirely driven off to seek other employment, or were sold for timber 
ships, at a song. Great improvement was constantly being made in marine engines 
to save consumption of fuel, and the lines that were known as the Inman. Guion, and 
White Star, which started in with cheap vessels, without much regard to speed, are 
now composed of magnificent, powerful mail steamers—one, the Inman, now sharing 
the English mail contract with the Cunard line, and the other two paid to carry the 
(hited ■States mails. Other lines have been started, made up of the abandoned vessels 
•of the four great lines, and so great has been the revolution in ocean steam navigation, 
and so cheaply are steamers now built, and running expenses so small, that sail cannot 
compete with these ordinary cargo vessels in the coarsest traffic between Great Britain 
and the United States, and I can add any part of Europe, the West Indies, and Brazil. 
The opening of the Suez Canal has so shortened the Indian and China voyage that 
these two trades are now largely carried on by English steamers. 

A little precarious trade is still found for voyages via Cape of Good Hope, in coal 
and other coarse cargoes at little profit, and our ship-owners are relieved when their 
vessels are lost or sold. Were it not for our coasting trade, which includes voyages 
to our Pacific ports, America would have very little ime for the stately ship. 

In tracing the decline of our marine I have confined myself to events and changes 
as they occurred—facts that come within our own remembrance. Meet a Scotch or 
English manufacturer or builder and he will at once commence to argue against 
our exclusive navigation laws, and talk of the hurtful working of our protective 
system. He speaks feelingly, for he either has a cheap ship or cheap goods to sell, and 
wants the monopoly of the American market. The American free-ship or free-trade 
advocate but echoes the hypocritical sophistry of the Briton, and, if ignorant of the 
truth, is to be pitied for his easy gullibility and want of intelligent examination; 
but if cognizant, becomes an enemy to his country’s best interests and merits unlimited 
condemnation. I do not think it necessary further to enlarge on this portion of the 
inquiry, and hope to have successfully covered the ground of my assertion that steam 
has caused the decline we all lament—steam nourished to its development on the 
part of our great commercial rival, Great Britain; neglected and left to perish from 
inanition by the Government of these United States. We now have left the consider¬ 
ation of methods for revival, and to search out the best, surest, and most economical. 
The Scotch and English builders, aided by a few deluded Americans, urge the abolish¬ 
ment of our navigation laws, the admission of foreign-built vessels to full registry, and 
free of all imposts. To my mind no economic purpose will be served by such a 
measure, but, on the contrary, it is open to very serious objections. The money must 
be .sent abroad to buy the perfect ship, and the waiving of duties a subsidy to the 
foreign builders hurtful if not ruinous to our own. If just so far we have no great 
amount of iron-shipbuilding, the construction of wood is still an extensive business. 
Builders of the latter material ask no aid other than they already have, but still the 
admission of foreign-built ships would ha ve an injurious effect on them, for Canada, 
New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia can at all times underbid them in the construction 
of new vessels. 

Free-ship advocates claim that, as iron-shipbuilders are but few and unimportant, 
they should be sacrificed to this hobby. This heartless disregard for others is not in 
accordance with the principles that govern tariff and protective legisla'ion, viz, to be 
just to all, and carefully avoid giving one interest an advantage that would be hurt- 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


25(J 


fill to another; and would it be just legislation that permits one man to purchase, 
profit on his investment, and rum the business of the builderf Another and very 
objectionable feature to this measure is that it opens wide the doors to fraud. All 
parties interested in this Question agree on the necessity for doing away with all the 
harassing disabilities that have formerly hampered American shipping. In tact, the 
free-ship advocates, although, under the teaching of their foreign allies, most strenu¬ 
ously opposing any assistance to be given to our own builders, are, if anything, more 
active for the abolishment of these disabilities, and the securing of mail contracts to 
vessels under the American dag, than patriotic citizens who desire the preservation 
of ship-building as an important American industry. These concessions area valuable 
factor in the revival of our lost steam navigation, and, once granted, the foreign lines 
now having the mail contracts would at once place their vessels under the American 
tlag to secure the benefit to be derived before'America us could move a finger, and any 
time when it suited their interest or convenience they could again be transferred to 
their own dag. I look upon the measure as s» dangerous and suicidal that I hope it 
will in no way be permitted to enter into the calculation for the revival of our com¬ 
mercial marine. If our iron-shipbuilders are few, so much the more they should be 
protected from the rich and numerous establishments of Great Britain, which, in spite 
of whatever other concessions made to them, would probably underbid and undersell 
until the American was compelled to close his yard and sacrifice his plant. In my 
opinion it is better to keep our fences up. It will cost no more, keep our money at 
home, encourage our own artisans, and preserve to us an industry valuable in peace 
and invaluable in war. 

Another mode suggested is by a bounty based on the difference of contracts between 
the two countries. This is a short way to a certain result, which I cannot, however, 
approve, as it would be a coutinual leaning on government, which would obviate 
any necessity for continual effort to improve the modes and cheapen shipbuilding. 
Auotlier proposition is by a drawback on all material that enters into the construc¬ 
tion of a ship, in order, as regards cost, she may be in the same category with those 
built in foreign ship yards. This is well, as far it goes, but precludes the use of do¬ 
mestic materials. American steel and iron are admitted to be better than British, and 
would make a stronger and more durable ship, and I would recommend that to the 
first should be annexed a bounty on American material equal to the duties on foreign. 
This looks like a direct money aid, but in reality amounts to the same thing, for the 
following reason: Our domestic production does not, and for a number of decades 
probably will not (considering the rapid growth of the country), equal consumption ; 
and if, say, a thousand tons of American iron were taken to build a ship, a thousand tons 
of foreign would have to be imported to make up for deficiency, and the duties col¬ 
lected on the latter would compensate for the bounty paid on the former, and if in 
like manner a thousand tons of foreign were used, another thousand must be imported.. 

In either case the sacrifice is equal, if sacrifice it is; for as it is estimated that 90 per 
cent, of thecostofa ship is labor, then the 10 to 15 per cent, which ilie whole country 
is called on to contribute is no sacrifice, for nearly the whole amount is scattered 
among various industries, and remains added to the nation’s wealth. We have got to 
look this question squarely in the face. No sane man cau ever hope to see it accom¬ 
plished without some present and apparent sacrifice, and see if a commercial marine 
is of sufficient value to warrant the aid given for its revival. If one-half the sums 
annually paid to foreign ship-owners can lie saved to our national wealth, to help sup¬ 
ply the sinews of trade, to say nothing of the sinews of war, then it is a sowing of 
seed to produce a golden harvest. There is hardly an article produced or made in this 
broad land except a ship but what enjoys some species of protection. The farmer is, 
protected in everything he raises from the soil either by a tariff in its nature prohib¬ 
itory, which insures the home market, or by a revenue tariff that shields him from the 
foreign grower, and the artisan on what he fashions with head and hand. Each in 
some way contributes something to the aid of his brother worker ; and cannot all this 
immense collection of interests contribute something to the building of our ships ? At 
least they owe to this struggling interest an intelligent examination to see if the end 
justifies the means, viz, the aid required to again place it among the healthy indus¬ 
tries of this our common country. The inequality in the cost of iron or steel between 
the United States and Great Britain is so great that, unless bounty or drawback can 
be procured to equalize the cost of ownership, no one can ever hope to see American 
capital embarked in what must necessarily prove a losing enterprise. The summing 
up of this method is but short: Tlie granting of such aid as will put the steamship, as 
regards cost, on a par with foreign vessels; the abolishment of all disabilities that 
now bear heavily on our shipping, that the American can run steam-vessels in com¬ 
petition with foreign owners; the securing to American-built mail steamers liberal 
contracts for carrying United States mails. The ordinary cargo steamer will then 
take care ol herselt, and the rest may be safely left to American skill and enterprise, 
which, given equal chance, fear no competition. 

I believe I have now replied to all the questions of the Congressional Joint Com- 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


257 


mittee on Shipping, it'not in detail, at least in the order as they relate to this subject. 
I have endeavored to contine myself strictly to facts as they occurred, and support my 
opinions by argument. As I consider my career virtually ended, I have no pecuniary 
interest to serve, and believe I am only guided by the principle that should actuate 
all patriotic citizens, to give the benefit of experience to forward, and to combat errors, 
prejudice, or selfishness that is likely to injure the interests of this our native land. 

Remaining, with highest respect, your obedieut servant, 

J. W. NORQROSS. 


STATEMENT OF R. G. F. CANDAGE. 

Hon. John W. Candler, M. C.: 

Dear Sir : In reply to your request for answers toinquiries by the “Joint Committee 
of Congress on shipping, &c.,” I submit the following : 

“ Question 1. Why can not this country build iron, steel, or wooden vessels as well 
and as cheaply as they are built in Scotland, England, and other countries?” 

Answer. Vessels of iron and steel cannot be built as cheaply in this country as in 
Scotland and England, for the reasons that the cost of materials and labor for their 
construction is higher in this country. Wooden vessels, on the other hand, can be built 
cheaper in 1 his country than in Great Britain, for the reason that timber is abundant 
in this country and comparatively cheap, while it is scarce and dearer there, and has 
to be imported, consequently wooden ships can be built in this country for 25 per cent, 
to 33 per cent, less than in Great Britain or other European countries. The British 
provinces of North America, however, can build wooden ships as cheaply, if not 
cheaper, thau they can be built in this country ; but as an offset, they are considered 
to be built of inferior materials and construction, and have a less commercial value 
in shipping circles as a rule. 

“Question 2. If we had such vessels without cost to us, could they be run by us in 
competition with those of other countries, who build their own vessels and run them 
with their own officers and crews, without modification or repeal of existing laws?” 

Answer. We do now run wooden sailing vessels in the foreign trade where we 
enter into competition with all other nations, and in so far as sailing vessels alone 
are concerned, hold our own pretty well ; and the new ships of this kind built from 
year to year show that there are those familiar with this interest willing to embark 
capital in it. 

With steam vessels the state of things is different. The routes where steamers 
would pay are occupied by foreign-built and foreigu-owned vessels, which have 
gained their present advantage by the help of government aid in the form of subsidies 
or mail contracts, until they are now so firmly intrenched in their advanced posi¬ 
tions that it would be hard to dislodge them, even with steamers without cost to 
American owners. By the liberal policy pursued by the British Government towards 
its steam marine—a policy worthy of imitation by ours—they have called into exist¬ 
ence the finest merchant marine the world has ever seen ; fostered the great industry 
of shipbuilding; invited capital to sustain it by the erection of enormous works in 
England and Scotland for building, equipping, and maintaining them over all com¬ 
petition. Under this state of things Americans cannot under their own flag success¬ 
fully compete with them without governmental aid in some form, until a foothold 
upon the carrying trade of the world has beeu obtained by steam vessels bearing our 
flag. When that has been accomplished we can safely rely upon the business tact, 
energy, and perseverance of American ship-owners, and the skill and push of our 
shipmasters and seamen, to assert the power to maintain the advantages thus gained. 

“Question 3. What modification of existing laws, or what new laws are required to 
remove discriminations against, and burdens upon, our shipping and ship-owning in¬ 
terests, such as customs dues, port dues, consular charges, pilotage, tonnage, and 
other dues, &c. ? ” 

Answer. A modification is required in the measurement of sailing vessels, so that 
all government charges shall be paid upon net tonnage, deducting crew and provision 
spaces; the same for steam vessels, with a further deduction for engine, boiler, and 
flue spaces. 

Seamen should be permitted to be discharged by law in foreign ports without extra 
pay, when in accordance with contract or by mutual consent. 

A reduction in custom house and consular fees. 

Stores for vessels engaged in the foreign trade should be taken out of bond duty 
free. 

Municipal taxes upon investments in shipping engaged in the foreign trade, and the 
same to be collected only upon net income. Tonnage dues to be reduced in amount 
upon all vessels, and paid by vessels engaged in the foreign trade at eaoh entry at 

()07-17 




258 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


the custom-lionse, instead of as now; on vessels in the coasting- trade, annually as 
now. 

Our government has been at great expense in lighting our coast, dredging and im¬ 
proving our harbors, marking and buoying dangerous rocks and shoals, all for the 
benefit of commerce and the shipping interest, and it seems but right that these in¬ 
terests should help support them. Steamers and all other vessels engaged in the 
foreign trade, and especially those under foreign flags, would pay a just proportion 
of this tax under this arrangement, which would be in lieu of light, harbor, town, 
and other duties exacted by Great Britain and other nations. 

Pilotage, in order to be efficient in its service, should be compulsory on all vessels 
engaged in the foreign trade. The rates should be reasonable for the service per¬ 
formed, but if paid by all vessels engaged in the foreign trade, it cannot be said that 
it i s particularly burdensome to American shipping competing with that of other 
nations for a part of the carrying trade. 1 hold that pilotage is an aid, and not a det¬ 
riment, to the safe conduct of vessels, with their officers, crews, passengers, cargoes, 
owners, underwriters, shippers, and consignees’ interests therein, to and from port; 
and on the ground of humanity and as a prevention against loss of life and property 
should be maintained. I speak upon this subject with the.knowledge begotten of u any 
years’ observation and experience as a ship-master, ship-owner, and one interested in 
shipping. 

“Question 4. Compare the laws of other countries with our own, with a view to 
their effect upon our and their shipping and ship-owning interests.” 

Answer. The merchant shipping of Great Britain pay charges on net tonnage, pay 
taxes on income only, discharge their crews without extra pay, take stores out of 
bond duty free on foreign voyages. These work to the advantage of their ships, but 
in so far as as our laws oppose these, they discriminate against our shipping. They 
(British vessels) pay less charges for rdiippiug their crews. 

The port charges there consist of light, harbor, and anchorage dues. Pilotage is 
compulsory in all the important ports of the kingdom, but rates are less than in the 
United States. Consular fees, I think, are less by one-half than ours, but am not sure; 
and the British Government still subsidises a number of its mail lines—either directly 
or by large mail contracts—which have not as yet become self-supporting. 

“ Question 5. Should our navigation laws be repealed or modified ; and, if modified, 
wherein and for wliat purpose ?” 

Answer. I don’t think they should be repealed. It is the duty of the government 
of any country to foster and aid its industries, which are its wealth; to encourage 
the employment,, of capital at home iustead of sending it abroad for investment, 
thereby giving employment to artisans and laborers in our own country instead of 
those of rival-countries. If our navigation laws were repealed there would be no 
iron or steel vessels built in this country, but they would be bought abroad. It is es¬ 
timated that DO per cent, of the cost of such a vessel is labor, taking all the material 
from which she is constructed from a state of nature. Were our country to neglect 
to foster the art of shipbuilding among us, which I think can be done by wise laws, 
and repeal our navigation laws, I think it would be a step in the wrong direction. 
Rather let her encourage shipbuilding, aid in regaining a fair share of the carrying 
trade, and it will k^ep our capital at home, employ American labor to rebuild our 
American shipping, and deal wisely with this great question. A modification of the 
navigation laws to the extent that foreign built vessels might be admitted to Ameri¬ 
can register by the payment of a proper duty sufficient to level up the difference be¬ 
tween the cost of construction in European countries and this iu labor, might be per¬ 
mitted without injury to any interests, and thus take away its prohibitory feature. 

“Question (I. What is the cost of component materials of iron, steel, or wooden ves¬ 
sels in other countries and our own ?” 

Answer. Plate and boiler iron in Great Britain ranges at from If to 2 cents per 
pound ; in this country, at 3f to 3| cents. Copper at 14 to 15 cents in Great Britain, 
and 18 to 20 cents iu the United States. Canvass about the same price in both ; wire 
rigging, about the difference there is in plates; and for timber for the construction of 
wooden vessels is about 30 per cent, higher in Great Britain than in this country. 
Chains and anchors are considerably cheaper in Great Britain than in the United 
States. 

“Question 7. What would be the effect of a rebate on any or all ‘such materials’?” 

Answer. A rebate M ould have the effect to equalize the'eost of material entering 
into the construction of iron and steel vessels, or approximately so. Then the ques¬ 
tion of labor in construction only remains. I am of opinion that American mechanics 
do more and better work in a given time than do those of Great Britain. Our ship¬ 
builders claim that the superiority of American mechanics, tools, and labor-saving ap¬ 
pliances will enable them to build as cheaply as can be done in Great Britain, if ma¬ 
terials be admitted duty free. How that would be in iron I am not able to say, but 
in the repairs or iu building of wooden ships it accords with my observation and ex¬ 
perience. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


259 


“Question 8. Present any other statement connected with tlie cause of the decline 
of the American foreign carrying trade, and what remedies can be applied by legisla¬ 
tion.” 

Answer. The decline in the American foreign carrying trade is entirely owing to 
steam taking the place of sail. When this new propelling power in the navigation 
of the Atlantic was first introduced our merchant marine stood nearly equal to that 
of Great Britain, the first among maritime nations. The first steamers were the side- 
wlieelers, requiring so much space for engines, boilers, and fuel that very little cargo 
space was lefr, consequently they were only adapted to carrying the mails and pas¬ 
sengers, and could not be made self-supporting. England aided hers with a liberal 
hand; what our government did for ours is a matter of history. Since then, and 
while this country was engaged in putting down the great rebellion, a great revolu¬ 
tion in ocean steam navigation has taken place. The screw has replaced the side 
wheels, iron has taken the place of wood in the construction of hulls; improvement 
in marine engines and the saving in fuel have so cheapened their running expenses 
that steamers on short voyages are found to be more profitable than sailing vessels. 
By her persistent and wise aid m the development of steam vessels, England now has 
a monopoly of the mail service and the carrying trade of the world. The United 
States has on the contrary r fused to encourge steam navigation, and to-day laments 
the loss of her slapping and a fair share of her own foreign carrying trade. 

In order that we may again participate in the profits to be derived from the for¬ 
eign carrying trade, and save to our people a part of the immense sums paid annually 
to foreign ship-owners, estimated to amount to $140,000,000, the government is called 
upon to aid and assist in putting a stop to this great drain upon our national wealth. 

The aid and assistance required would be in the simplest way, after such changes 
in existing laws as have been herein suggested, to allow a drawback of from 10 to 20 
per cent, on the cost of materials entering into ilie construction of vessels, so that 
they may be as cheap to American owners, whqp built in this country, as they are to 
British owners in theirs. 

If Americans would intelligently examine this subject and see the great value of a 
steam marine to our national wealth and defense, I feel certain that the necessary 
aid would not be withheld to place it among other prosperous interests of our common 
country. 

Volumes have been, and others might be written upon this interesting and impor¬ 
tant subject without exhausting it, but I have confined myself simply to answer the 
questions asked, in some cases, perhaps, at the risk of clearness of statement rather 
than appear too profuse. 

My views, such as they are, are at your service, and if in any way they can aid your 
committee in solving the great problem of how we can build up our shipping inter¬ 
ests, I shall feel that I have not labored in vain. 

Yours, truly, 

R. G. F. CANDAGE. 

Boston, October 5, 1882. 


STATEMENT OF M. FIELD FINLEY. 

New York, November 18,1882. 

Committee on Shipping: 

Gentlemen : I have been engaged in commercial pursuits fifty years. I have owned 
and chartered many vessels, and had mercantile intercourse with the East and West 
Indies and Europe,” but have now no personal direct interest in vessels or trade. Some 
forty to fifty years ago New York had eight or ten ship-yards, and they would gener¬ 
ally'have 5,000 to 10,000 tons of vessels on the stocks at a time, and New-York-built 
ships were considered the best and fastest in the world. At this time, and up toabout 
1850, nearly all the trade with the South and West was carried on by sailing packets 
from Boston, New York, and Philadelphia, to Charleston, Savannah, Mobile, and New 
Orleans, and during the year, except perhaps a few months in summer, the arrivals 
at New York and Boston* would be frequently 5 or 10 ships or barks daily. The trade 
from these ports to London, Liverpool, Havre, &c., employed a large number of ships, 
carrying generally a great many cabin passengers, which were a very important fac¬ 
tor. ” I made a passage from New Orleans to New \ ork in 1840 with over 50 cabin 
passengers, and in 1844 I went to Liverpool trom New \ork in a packet-ship with 
over 60 cabin passengers, and I think the fare was over $100. I returned in the Eng¬ 
lish steamer Great Western with about 200 cabin passengers. She was among the 
first successful passenger steamers in the American and European trade, and the 
New York liners began then to lose prestige; but about 1849 the California gold fever, 
as it was called, broke out, which gave a wonderful impetus to shipbuilding in New 
York, Boston, and Maine, which turned out some magnificent clipper ships, and New 



260 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


York :ilso went largely into building wooden steamships for the California and 
European trade ; but about this time, 1850 to 1855, railroads became a great competing 
factor in the coasting trade, and together with steamers now monopolize nearly all 
the business carried on by sailing vessels np to 1860. On the breaking out of the war 
our foreign trade began to slip away from American vessels, a large number of 
which were sold to foreigners. Twenty years previous, in 1859, there were 600 ships 
at one time in the port of New Orleans. Now our foreign commerce is nearly all in 
the hands or under the Hag of English and other nations, by steam or sail, and 
there is an honest and great diversity of opinion as to the cause or remedy. Has 
the Yankee’s right hand lost its cunning and skill? Is it oppressive taxation or 
too much or too little protection? Can John Bull, who is very much dependent 
upon us for his food, eat our beef and corn and take the bread and butter out of (he 
mouth of the Yankee skipper, sailor, or ship-builder? The ship-owners tell us nine- 
tenths of their ships’ crews are now foreigners, and we certainly can hire them, one 
would suppose, as cheap as the foreign ship-owner. The New York ship-yards are 
all deserted and the ship-carpenter’s occupation, like Othello’s, is gone, unless he 
can find repairs to do on some unfortunate foreigner overtaken by a gale or accident. 
British steamers and iron sailing ships bring our merchandise from the East and West 
Indies, as well as Europe, and go off with flying colors and full cargoes of beef and 
corn, the pilotage and wages of stevedores being about all the money or British gold 
they leave behind them, and the Yankees and Knickerbock* is suck their fingers and 
petition Congress in vain for relief! History tells us that Massachusetts alone had, in 
1758, .504 vessels, measuring 28,000 tons, engaged in the whale fisher es; and, in 1850 r 
8,000 seamen and 102,000 tons were employed in th ; s trade out of New England ; and 
in 1854 it had increased to 208,000 tons, consisting of 602 ships and barks, 28 brigs, and 
5a schooners. This trade or interest flourished thus up to that date directly in com¬ 
petition with all the pauper labor and frightful bugbears or tales of ruin pictured 
by our protectionists as lurking around the docks and harbors of Old England, which 
the Yankees defied until lard oil and petroleum were discovered. 

Tin*, hog and Pennsylvania oil well have done what John Bull could not do, drive 
the Yankee whaler off the seas. War and war taxes lia\ e opened the way for England 
and other nations to nearly drive our flag since off the ocean, and she has got the 
inside track in steam navigation. We can’t expect to get it back in a day or a year. 
We don’t want any more of what is called “protection.” Ship-builders and ship¬ 
owners don’t want to play the dog in the manger, and they don’t want to exist on 
subsidy or bounty granted by Congress. Take off the shackles where they exist and 
give the Yankee the same chance the Englishman has, and if we can’t keep our heads 
above water we must sink. Give us iron and coal as cheap as the Englishman has it, 
and if we can’t beat him as we did in the whale fishery we must be content to make 
our pleasure excursions to Europe in steamers built on the Clyde or Tyne, flying a 
foreign flag. We cannot expect tlm West will consent to pay any more freight on 
their produce under our flag. The day for sailing wooden vessels is passing away. 
A steamer that does the carrying business often or twenty sailing vessels must in the 
end be victorious in the coasting or foreign trade unless it is long voyages or the trans¬ 
portation of coal, lumber, or other cheap merchandise in which time is not an element 
of importance; but the increase of commerce will enable sailing vessels to live for 
years to come, and do perhaps a prosperous trade. 

Yours, very respectfully, 

M. FIELD FINLEY. 


STATEMENT OF NATHANIEL SPOONER. 

Boston, September 29, 1882. 

Hou. John W. Candler, M. C.: 

Dear Sir: In reply to the questions of your circular of 18tli instant, I would say r 

First. This country cannot build iron or steel vessels so well and cheaply as Great 
Britain, because Great Britain has a much larger and longer experience of this indus¬ 
try than we have, has a morn extensive and better plant, the most “cunning arti¬ 
ficers” of iron, steel, and brass the world has yet produced ; and all skilled labor neces¬ 
sary is cheaper and more abundant there than here. I believe that in this as all other 
industries far greater economy is practiced, and there is less recklessness and waste on 
the other side of the Atlantic than with us. Wooden ships can be built here as well 
and cheaply as those of a similar class, quality, and finish in Great Britain or other 
country. 

Second. Though it seems to be holding our sagacitv, energy, and general business 
capability at a very low estimate, yet I doubt, if ships were furnished without cost, we 
could, lwider present laws, successfully compete with other countries where there is 
less restriction, especially with Great Britain. 



AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


261 

Third. Reduction of one-half the present United States tonnage dues. No taxation 
ot ships m foreign trade, or where other tlags are in competition, only on profit or in¬ 
come accruing, l'owtr to hold officers and seamen at home or abroad till expira¬ 
tion ot contract, with liberty to abrogate the same at any time or place, by mutual 
consent of the parties thereto, on payment of wages due, without further payment or 
liability on the part of ship or owners, except in case of sickness, the same not being 
wrought by hyilt or misconduct of the party discharged, when, if in a foreign port, 
one or two mouths’additional pay, at the discretion of the United States consul, might 
be required. 

Consular charges or fees as a whole do not appear onerous or unjust, but a consul’s 
powers and duties, as well as fees, should be well defined. 

Customs dues and port charges of this country are generally moderate enough and 
their removal would be small help to the shipping interest. As a shipmaster for more 
than thirty-one years, 1 believe in a well-organized and wel’-ordered system of pilotage, 
consider the pilot entering aud leaving port as part and parcel of the necessary equip¬ 
ment and discipline of every vessel, and that in the interest of economy, prudence, and 
humanity such a system should be maintained. Compensation for service and other 
matters of detail should be well considered by the law-making powers of each port. 

In the measurement of a vessel for assessment of tonnage or other government dues 
or port charges of any kind, only the actual passenger and cargo capacity of the same 
should be taken into account. Accommodation for officers and crew and room for 
stores and equipment should be thrown out. 

Fourth. I am not sufficiently acquainted with the navigation laws of other coun¬ 
tries to make the required comparison, but am decidedly of opinion no nation has 
better understood the proper fostering and development of maritime interests than 
Great Britain. Most of her laws would apply as well and be as beneficial to our 
merchant shipping as to hers, but to insure equal value they must be equally well 
enforced. 

Fifth. Our navigation laws should be so amended or modified as, while giving wise 
aud wholesome but stringent measures for protection of life and property, for proper 
<1 rill and discipline of the mercantile marine, due encouragement should be given to 
owner, master, officer, and seaman. Every maritime nation or people has entered for 
the race in the carrying trade of the world, and they who would win should counte¬ 
nance no unnecessary hinderance. 

A merchant seaman’s shipping act similar to that of Great Britain, but somewhat- 
modified and adapted to our style of habit and thought, seems to me wanted, or rather 
needed. 

We need a good apprentice law ; laws for suppression of the crimp, or sailor runner, 
and the horde of scoundrels that prey upon seamen in every port. So far as possible, 
advance wages should be abolished, but if impracticable to do this wholly, payment 
should be secured to the seaman or his family only. Extra pay or reward for Ion / and 
faithful service would do great good. Examinations of aster and officers by compe¬ 
tent tribunals and certificates of competency ;md ability granted, to be withheld for 
cause, and without which no one could serve in such or higher capacity, would, if 
faithfully and impartially administered, benefit and improve our mercantile marine. 

To repeat, I have no doubt but the merchant seaman’s shipping act of Great Britain, 
Judiciously fitted to our meridian, would be of great benefit to the shipping interest. 
There is equally no doubt but it would be strongly opposed, would be difficult of 
enactment, and still more difficult to enforce. 

“I believe the ship-owner should not be restricted to builders of this country, but 
permitted to build or buy his vessel of whatever description, from a catamaran or 
Chinese junk to the Czar’s yacht Livadia, wherever his interests or fancied interests 
dictate; that he lie granted an American register so soon as he can show his title, and 
that there be no distinction or disability in the general foreign trade, or in any trade, 
between her and a vesssel built, if you please, on Plymouth Rock by proved direct 
descendants of the Pilgrim fathers.”* 

Sixth. I am unable to give an opinion entitled to any weight. 

Seventh. Rebate in cost of any material used in construction of vessels, as tending 
to reduce first cost of the same, could but benefit the ship-owner. 

Eighth While many of our shipping and navigation laws have outlived their use¬ 
fulness, and arenow but obstructions, hinderances, and absurdities—while government 
officials at home and abroad have applied the squeezing process iti method and man¬ 
ner that Chinese mandarins might envy—neither they nor the Alabama, with other 
“rebel pirates,” nor the cheap ships of Europe, nor “pauper labor,” nor “British 
god] ”—no one nor all of these would have,to use the common words, “driven our 
ships from the seas,” had there not been more profitable investments for merchants 
and capitalists. Notwithstanding all the wailing aud lamentation—all the rivalry of 


' From an article of mine in the Boston Post. 





262 


AMERICAN SHIPRING INTERESTS. 


compel ing nations—there is small doubt but the American flag will fly whenever and 
wherever it will pay to hoist it. 

There are disabilities to be removed, wise and just laws and regulations to be en¬ 
acted and upheld, economies to be practiced, and a determination evolved to meet 
our competitors on the world’s highway, beat them if we can in thoroughness and 
cheapness, bear our honors without brag and boast if we win, and submit with grace 
and good humor if we lose. 

Much more can be said on this subject, but lack of leisure compels rae to stop here,, 
simply adding that I am, 

Very truly, yours, 

NATH’L SPOONER. 


STATEMENT OF C. T. HOPKINS, Esq. 


Mr. Hopkins said: 

Mr. President and Gentlemen : At a meeting of the Board of Trade, held some 
two months ago, a committee on ocean navigation was appointed, of which com¬ 
mittee I had the honor of being appointed chairman. The committee, in examining 
the enormous question before them, found that the proper place to begin with w r as 
an endeavor to procure the passage of such an amendment of the laws of the United 
States as will make it possible once more for American capital to be engaged in for¬ 
eign trade in competition with the shipping of all other nations upon the free ocean. 
Finding this to be indispensable to any attempt to enlist capital in any such enter¬ 
prise, we have prepared a memorial which we lo g leave to submit, and which we 
make as a partial report of the committee, and the adoption of which we ask. 

THE MERCHANT MARINE MEMORIAL. 

To the Joint Committee of the Senate and House of Representatives on the Restoration of 

American Shipping: 

This memorial of the ship-owners and merchants of San Francisco respectfully 
shows: 

That the immense and constantly growing foreign carrying trade of San Francisco, 
now the sixth among the ninety-three seaports of the Union, is so completely in the 
hands of foreign ship-owners that only twelve out of five hundred and fifty ves¬ 
sels loaded at this port for Europe during the harvest year ending June 30, 1882, 
were owned at San Francisco. 

That for said period of twelve months the freight paid on exports to Europe alone, 
by sea, amounted to $16,069,789, and that the aggregate of inward and outward 
freights in the foreign trade to and from all ports on this coast must be not far from 
$25,000,000 annually, the proportion whereof earned by vessels owned at American 
Pacific ports is an insignificant fraction of the whole. 

That the present lamentable decay of the American merchant marine in the foreign 
trade has been entirely due to the failure of our government to change the laws to 
suit the changing exigencies of modern progress; while other nations, especially Eng¬ 
land, have always given close attention to every detail of this great subject, and, 
therefore, by the substitution of iron and steel for wood, of steam for sail, by exempt¬ 
ion from taxation, by government employment as mail carriers, and by the use of 
every means calculated to improve and cheapen transportation by sea, they have 
underbid us in every port and on every sea, so that in another decade, unless Congress 
comes intelligently to our relief, they will have completely excluded the American 
flag from the foreign trade everywhere. 

That while wooden ships can yet be built in the United States as cheaply as in many 
foreign countries, the world now demands ships of iron and steel, but Americans are 
prevented by the tariff from constructing such vessels save at a cost so much greater 
than those ot England as to confine their building to the coasting trade, in which 
they are protected from foreign competition. 

that the high tariff of the United States, therefore, makes the bus ness of iron and 
steel shipbuilding for the foreign trade impossible, 

That State and municipal taxation on the values of vessels instead of on their net 
earnings, as in England; the continued maintenance of United States statutes that 
compel the payment of American rates of wages out and home; of high consular fees 
abroad; of three month"* extra wages to seamen discharged abroad ; the maintenance 
ot treaties an ith thirty-four maritime nations, all of which prevent our discrimination 
in favor of American shipping; and the persistent refusal of our government to give- 
employment as mail carriers to American vessels, are the principal causes which effect 
the destruction of our business upon the high seas. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERES l S. 


263 


That though Congress may, at any session, wlien so disposed, pass such laws as we 
shall presently suggest, their effect will he hut temporary in the absence of frequent 
future legislation to meet future exigencies; and therefore our maritime supremacy, 
even if regained, cannot he maintained unless a regular department he organized in 
the executive branch, like the British hoard of trade, for the sole purpose of watching 
this interest, and suggesting from time to time the legislation it requires. 

That while we recognize the stimulus given hv the tariff to all protected domestic 
industries, and especially to American labor, we beg to remind the country that our 
business has been thereby ruined—sacrificed to the general good. Our property has 
been rendered worthless, without compensation, for the benefit of the public at large. 
For, while the protected domestic market recoups the high cost, and guarantees a 
profit on all protected articles of American manufacture, the cost of building our ves¬ 
sels is raised by the same means, but our market is not likewise protected. On the 
contrary, our shipping in the foreign trade must compete witlioutany possible protec¬ 
tion from our government in the free open market of the world, which, of course, 
hires vessels where it can hire cheapest. If high interest on high cost, high wages, 
taxes, fees, repairs, Arc., make $1,000 per month the cost of running an American ship, 
while low interest on low cost, low wages, and the absence of taxes, fees, or repairs 
bring down the cost of running an English ship to $500 per month, who does not per¬ 
ceive that the English vessel will make money where the American owner must soon 
became bankrupt ? Yet this is the actual condition of the shipping business now, and 
such it has been since the enactment of our present high tariff. 

That under these circumstances common justice to our injured class, regard for the 
national honor abroad, as well as for the national economy which requires the reten¬ 
tion in our own country of the enormous freights paid on American exports to other 
nations, and the national safety in case of foreign war—all these motives justify us in 
the demand that we should be placed, as far as possible, in such a position as if there 
were no tariff: and that such legislation should be promptly enacted as will place 
American ship-owners on an equality with those of England. Unloose the fetters; 
remove the weights imposed on us by our ill-fitting and outgrown laws; leave us free, 
as are the English, to utilize our abundant materials, our energy and skill; and doubt 
not American mechanics and sailors will soon again overtake their rivals on the seas. 

To this end we do not ask for the repeal of the navigation laws, nor for the reduc¬ 
tion of the tariff, nor for the admission of foreign iron or steel plates or steam ma¬ 
chinery free of duty; but we do ask for a law which shall appropriate to our use such 
portion of the revenue the government receives for protecting the iron interest at our 
expense as will give to every builder of an iron or steel vessel for the foreign trade, 
using only American metals, a sum equal to the duties on an equivalent weight and 
description of imported metals. 

And hereto we beg to adduce— 

That such a bounty would reduce to the English standard the cost of the metals 
used in building the kind of vessel the world demands. 

That it would stimulate the production of iron and steel from American mines in¬ 
stead of English, which latter would alone be benefited, should the law of 18/2, ad¬ 
mitting other materials for shipbuilding duty free, be amended so as to include iron 
and steel plates. 

That it would furnish much better metal than the English. 

And that though the higher price of American labor would still work against us, we 
expect to overcome this by the use of superior machinery, by our greater mechanical 
skill, and by the production of a better vessel. 

Furthermore, we beg to urge this measure as a compromise between the “ free-ship” 
men and the “tariff” men. For if American registers be once granted to foreign-built 
vessels, for the foreign trade, the same privilege will soon be demanded for the coast¬ 
ing trade, with the sure result of gradually consigning to oblivion the art of building 
iron vessels in the United States, thus ieaving us, like Germany, China, and the 
South American states, dependent wholly upon England forour shipping, and in time 
of war utterly unable to provide a navy for our defense. And we seek not to encoun¬ 
ter the opposition of the friends of a high tariff on iron, for we of California need not 
only protection but also the bounty we ask for, in order to the development of our 
own iron mines, as yet almost untouched, but on whose future workings depends the 
inauguration of our own shipbuilding, and the future defense of our coast in time of 
war. 

Furthermore, we beg to remind the nation that the bounty we ask would not be a 
subsidy levied upon many industries for the benefit of a few, but simply the payment 
of a debt due by the many enterprises which are prospering by means of the tariff 
to the one which has been ruined by it. That we are in the position of owners of 
car <>’0 which has been jettisoned to save the vessel, and are entitled to be made good 
by a general average contribution. Why should not the damage voluntarily—though 
perhaps unwittingly—inflicted by the government upon the shipping interests, for 


264 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


tlie benefit of the country at large, be repaid by those who have thriven through our 
destruction. 

So much your memoralists respectfully beg leave to press upon your attention, in 
obviation of the obstructions to shipbuilding, caused by the present laws. But as 
it will be little use to cheapen the cost of building, unless it be also made possible to 
utilize American vessels after they are built, we further ask that you will recommend 
the prompt passage of acts to the following purport: 

1st. Repeal the last clause of section 4131 of the Revised Statutes, “And officers of 
vessels of the United States shall in all cases be citizens of the United States.” 

2d. Repeal all sections or parts of sections numbered 4561, 4580, 4581, 4582, 4583, 
4584, 4600, that provide for the payment of three months’ or one month’s extra pay 
to seamen when discharged in a foreign port, and substitute therefor a statute to the 
following effect, which is now the law of Great Britain: 

When a seaman is discharged at a foreign port, from any cause except shipwreck, 
or from unfitness or inability from illness to proceed on the voyage, unless he has been 
guilty of barratry, or is undergoing a sentence of imprisonment imposed by a legally 
constituted court, the master of the vessel shall, besides paying the wages to which 
such seaman is entitled, upon the application of such seaman at time of payment, 
either provide him with adequate employment on board some other ship bound to the 
port at which he was originally shipped, or to such other port as may be agreed upon 
by him, or furnish the means of sending him back to such port, or provide him with 
a passage home, or deposit with the consular officer such a sum of money as is by such 
officer deemed sufficient to defray the expenses of his subsistence and passage home. 
This law shall apply equally to the case where ’lie whole or part of the crew of a ship 
are discharged, in consequence of termination of agreement, or are left, behind ille¬ 
gally*. The deposits are to be calculated so as to allow for passages at ordinary lowest 
fares. 

When a seaman is discharged in consequence of injuries sustained while in the 
service of the ship, the master shall be liable for necessary expenses incurred for med¬ 
ical advice and subsistence, until such time as the seaman can be returned to such 
port as may* be agreed upon, in addition to the wages due and passage as herein pro¬ 
vided for. 

If the cause of discharge is unfitness or inability to proceed on the voyage on ac¬ 
count of illness, the master shall only be liable to pay the balance of wages due up 
to the time of discharge, provided such illness is not caused by a want of such food, 
water, accommodations, medicines, or anti-scorbutics as are required by law. 

3d. We recommend the following addition to the particulars prescribed for the 
shipping articles: 

Instead of stating the nature and duration of the intended voyage or engagement, 
it shall be lawful to state the maximum period of the voyage or engagement, and 
the places or parts of the world, if any, to which the voyage or engagement is not to 
extend. 

We believe that such a change in the law will be of great benefit to seamen, espe¬ 
cially when employed on short voyages. 

4th. Allow 50 cents per day for each aud every day a seaman is on board, on a pas¬ 
sage home, in lieu of the $10 for the passage, regardless of its length, now provided 
in section 4578, as the price to be paid by the government for returning American sea¬ 
men to their home port. 

5th. Abolish all the fees of United States consular offices now collected from ship 
ping, and make good any resulting deficiency in their compensation by* regular sal¬ 
aries. 

6tli. Allow a rebate of the tonnage-tax of 30 cents per ton on each 300 tons of the 
vessel’s register, for which an American apprentice shall be carried in the foreign 
trade, and compel all vessels in the coasting trade to carry at least one apprentice to ' 
every 300 tons of her enrollment. Enact severe penalties for enticing an apprentice 
to desert. 

7th. Abolish the laws obliging masters to return seamen to the American port of 
shipment, and allow crews of any nationality to be shipped anywhere on time or by* 
the voyage. 

8th. Make it a penal offense to demand or pay in advance wages to seamen in any 
American port, or any* bonus for shipping seamen, and that all such payments shall 
be void in law in final settlement with seamen. Enforce this against foreign vessels 
by* requiring the collector to refuse a clearance in case of its violation. 

fith. Make it a criminal offense for a master to charge any seaman as profit on any* 
article furnished f rom the ship’s slopjeliest more than 25 per cent, on the wholesale 
price at the port of sailing; but oblige all vessels bound on foreign voyages to carry 
a slop chest supplied with certain specified articles and outfits for seamen, as is now 
the case with the medicine chest. 

10th. Allow all provisions, stores, and supplies used or consumed on board vessels, 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 2o5 

where such vessels are bound upon a voyage to any foreign port, to be taken out of 
bond free of duty. 

Hth. Declare all shipping engaged in the foreign trade to be under the protection of 
the United States, and therefore exempt, from State and municipal taxation. 

And your memorialists do further pray for the establishment of a Bureau of Com¬ 
merce, with a cabinet officer at its head, and with duties analogous to those of the 
British Board of Trade, such as, the control of a national pilot service at all ports of 
the United States, to the exclusion of State pilotage, and of compulsory pilotage 
when the master is a competent pilot. The examination, certificating, and discipline 
of officers of merchant vessels. The inpsection of hulls and boilers of steamers, and 
of passenger accommodations. The control of the business of shipping and paying 
seamen, now transacted by the shipping commissioner. The enforcement of all laws 
relating to seamen. The recognition of distinguished courage and service on the part 
of officers and seamen, and the general supervision of the interests of our mercantile 
marine. Notably should it be the duty of this bureau to keep constantly a watchful 
eye upon the needs of our maritime commerce and to recommend to Congress, from 
time to time, such legislation as will foster its development . 

And your memorialists do further pray that your honorable bodies will establish ocean 
postal routes, to be competed for by first-class American steamships, built of iron or steel, 
of large tonnage and high speed, in accordance with government specifications ; which 
should, to the limited extent that is practicable, adapt them to transport and rapid 
cruiser service in time of war. A liberal compensation for postal service to be paid 
such established lines, under a general law authorizing: the Postmaster-General to 
make ten or twenty year contracts for the carriage of mails to important maritime 
ports, with as frequent departures as may be deemed advisable. 

We repel the idea of subsidy in this connection also. The service, as the experience 
of Great Britain has proven, will be worth all it costs the nation, and pay tar better 
than extravagant postal contracts on remote inland routes will, where we have no 
foreign competition to contend with, and no commercial interests to develop. The 
establishment of these ocean postal and passenger routes has been a favorite and 
highly successful method with our competitors for the development of their foreign 
commerce, and is absolutely necessary on the part of our government if we would com¬ 
pete with them; for it must be kept in mind that while our protective laws may ac¬ 
complish any aim intended within our own country (as in the case of our coasting 
commerce), it would be useless for us to seud out our steamships to compete with for¬ 
eign lines on terms of such inequality as would render the contest hopeless from the 
start. The expense of carrying out this policy would amount to between four and 
five million dollars annually, and we respectfully suggest that it would be eminently 
proper for Congress to enact such laws as would authorize the appropriations neces¬ 
sary for this purpose. This recommendation is so important in its character that we 
cannot dismiss it without the remark that no remedial legislation will avail that does 
not substantially cover its requirements. 

In conclusion, your memorialists beg leave to respectfully represent: That the long 
and persistent neglect by Congress, of our foreign shipping interests, has redounded 
enormously to the advantage of Great Britain, and of other m iritime nations, to our 
own great damage, not only in our material interests, but in the respect in which our 
flag is held abroad. Our growing weakness on the seas, the disappearance of our Navy, 
now hardly necessary in the absence of shipping for it to protect, ha ve made us an ob¬ 
ject of contempt even to the little state of Chili; and our pretense of maintaining the 
Monroe doctrine, without shipping to make it of value, or force to uphold it, is merely 
a farce in the eyes of maritime nations. That San Francisco owns shipping only in 
the coasting and island trade, and has never been able under existing laws to have 
any perceptible interest, in tin', carrying to Europe other enormousaud increasing ex¬ 
ports. That in default of such interest her position as the Queen City of rhe Pacific is 
of little use to her citizens or to the nation, but valuable almost wliollv to the ship¬ 
owners of foreign nations, whose flags are continually present in our harbor, to the 
almost total exclusion of our own from the most valuable portion of our trade. That 
the exigencies of the situation now require the most studous application and patriotic 
devotion of our Congressmen, regardless of party to a subject whose national impor¬ 
tance is paramount to almost everv other. That we earnestly urge upon your com¬ 
mittee, and upon each member of the Pacific delegation, the necessity of success in this 
object, as an indispensable preliminary to the establishment of the steel steamer-build¬ 
ing business on this coast, as weli as at all other available points in our country, 
notably along the Mississippi River, where coal and iron are always cheapest. And 
that the successful carrying of these measures will be. to their advocates in Congress 
the surest means of gaining distinction, and will entitle them to that popular grat i¬ 
tude which ever attends the faithful and patriotic statesman. 

And your memorialists will ever pray. 


266 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


New York, November 20, 1882. 

Hod. S. S. Cox, " . 

Member of Congressional Committee investigating the Decadence oj American Shipping : 

Dear Sir: In answer to your request to furnish the committee with the compara¬ 
tive prices of ship-building materials as produced in England and in this country, I 
respectfully submit the following: 

Plate iron in Great Britain is only 7 pounds 10 shillings per ton—$36 ; the same plate 
iron costs here $67.20, a difference of $31.20 in favor ot the British builders. It is said 
that American iron is superior to the English, which statement, in my opinion, is 
untrue, and certainly has no bearing on the present question* Again, llange iron in 
England costs 11 pounds 15 shillings—$56.84 per ton ; American iron, same quality, is 
quoted to-day at $106.40 per ton, another item in favor of the British builder of $49.56 
per ton. English angle and “ lee’ 7 iron costs$38.92 a ton ; American, $89.60, one more 
item against the American builder of $50.68 per ton, and the same difference in cost 
against the American builder accompanies the various shapes for beams, keelsons, 
girders, &c. 

To continue: English bar iron costs $33.24 a ton ; American, $56; difference, $22.76. 
These prices show the range of the difference in cost through the various classes of 
iron needed to build the hull of a ship, and also the financial odds which is a “con¬ 
stant” against the American builder. Some cast iron is used in the engines, which 
costs in England $12.24 per ton ; here it costs $26.50 a ton, double that of the English. 

Moreover, English steel plates are quoted, October 16, 1882, at $49.60 a ton. These 
same plates would cost here, according to the report of the Naval Committee of the 
last Congress, 8 cents per pound, or $179.20 per ton. This difference of $129.60 per 
ton in favor of the British builder is by no means overestimated, and while it may 
not be commercially true, from the fact that no steel plates for ship-building have 
yet been manufactured in this country, the probability of the difference—$129.60— 
being underestimated herein, is a strong one. These quotations of English prices are 
from the circular of John Williams & Co., Liverpool, England. 

In view of these facts, no one can dispute tlm enormous disadvantage that an Amer¬ 
ican ship-builder labors under; for the production of a ship, in competition with for¬ 
eign builders, is simply an impossibility. I have not considered the important factor 
of the labor, which, as every intelligent man knows, is much cheaper in England than 
here, and which adds still further to the vast odds against our mechanics. Neither 
is it necessary to analyze the causes which contribute to make all ship-building ma¬ 
terials so much more costly here than abroad. It has been so for years, and 1 fancy 
that nothing like a reduction can be made by any kind of legislation that will put 
our ship-builders on an equal footing with those of Great Britain ; at least, not imme¬ 
diately. 

This question has been before the Legislature of this country for the past twenty 
years, and who can deny that, during this time, ship-building has been protected? — 
to death. There are a few ship-builders—a forlorn hope—down in Maine, and, it is 
said, one or two on the Delaware; but where, I would ask, are the ship-owners? 
Where are the merchant princes, the opulent commercial firms, who owned and sailed 
fleets of ships, under the American flag, some years ago? They are living, many of 
them, and have descendants, but. in regard to this matter of a national shipping, they 
have not been combative. They have simply withdrawn their large capital, sold 
their ships, and moved their offices away from South street ; in fact, “ changed front.”' 
Being men of ke n intelligence, and following the lines of the least resistance, they 
have not been troubled to find better investments than a “ protected” shipping. 

Capital is proverbially shy, and it seems to me as clear as daylight that the only 
question worthy ot consideration in this matter of restoring to our people some of the 
valuable shipping interest we once had, and have so stupidly lost, is what can be done 
immediately to woo capital back in the old-time channels. 

It legislation can entice the capitalists of this country to run ships in competition 
with those ot other countries, it will be only by making such business profitable. 

This proposition, I think, needs no elucidation. 

Before a profit can accrue to the ship-owner, in addition to the running expenses of 
the ship, the interest on the capital, her insurance, and her depreciation must be sub¬ 
tracted from her warnings. These latter items are inseparable from the investment, 
and are based, singly and collectively, on the ship’s first cost. Hence the economic 
importance ot a minimum—to a ship-owner—first cost. From time immemorial, too, 
maritime law has recognized the ship not only as a tool of the merchant, but also as 
an implement without which the sailor cannot exist. Thus it should be seen that 
taxation levied directly or indirectly upon shipping is as illegally oppressive as it can 
be st upid. I he ship should be as tree as the elements are which, in her service, she 
has to contend with ; and surely, in view ot the present state of our shipping, this is 
no time to advance fastidious or wire-drawn propositions for its relief. Taxation on 
ships, in the gross, should be abolished, and the disinterested intelligent man who 


2(37 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 

does not agree with me in this opinion I have yet to meet. Of course, this brings at 
once to “ free ships”; and why not? 

Commerce of any kind, and particnarly that with foreign countries, is of slow 
growth. The merchant must feel his way. The element of risk is enhanced indeed, 
when to the cost attending his venture and in competition with his rivals, the ship¬ 
owner of this country must invest from fifty to one hundred per cent, more money 
than they. Such a necessity amounts to prohibition, and that ship-builders should be 
so short-sighted for years as to attempt the bolstering up of their own interest in 
opposition to that of the merchants, is not flattering to their intelligence, *in my 
opinion. It is, in fact, putting the cart before the horse, aud the result of such a 
senseless policy is obvious. Our merchants have no foreign trade, comparatively 
speaking, and, consequently, need no ships; aud in passing I would remark that they 
are not thrusting their views of this matter upon your committee, which in itself 
speaks volumes as to their indifference. Could they build, buy, or sail ships as cheaply 
as foreigners, many ventures would, no doubt, be undertaken that now are not enter¬ 
tained for a moment. Did they own ships, the necessity for their employment would 
be an incentive to ventures that would benefit, more or less, the common couutry. 
But met as they are on every hand by the hydra-headed fallacy of a “ protective n 
policy, the merchant ship-owner has been stifled to death, and there survives in his 
place only a few brokers or agents. The primary consideration at the present time 
for all concerned in the matter, as I view the question, is how can we make ship¬ 
owners. The interest of ship builders must follow this, as a consequence, view the 
matter in any light you may. Twenty odd years of “ protection” shows conclusively 
that it cannot come before. 

If it be the wish of Congress, which heretofore has treated all suggestions made to 
aid our shipping with contempt, that the people of this country shall enjoy some por¬ 
tion of the hundreds of millions of dollars that are paid annually for the freighting of 
its own products, no more efficient legislative aid can be given than to pass im¬ 
mediately a bill allowing ships builtabroad to be owned in this country. The absurd 
and grossly extortionate expenses which attend the sailing of our ships 1 will not 
mention here, as, I fancy, they have been sufficiently exposed to you, and that they 
will be abolished in toto. 

I am, very respectfully, yours, 

NATHANIEL McKAY. 

New York, September 4, 1882. 

To the Secretary of Joint Committee on Shipping, <jV.: 

Sir: In answer to question No. 1, I have to say that we cannot build iron or steel 
vessels in this country as < heaply as in Great Britain. The reasons are, that labor is 
cheaper and the iron or steel is cheaper in England. 

In answer to question No. 2, I am of the opinion that we could not run them at a 
profit in the open freight market against foreign competition unless we have a modi¬ 
fication or repeal ot our existing laws. 

A foreign ship-owner is satisfied with 5 per cent, dividends if he cannot get more; 
but the taxes we would have to pay would eat up our 5 per cent; therefore, we can¬ 
not compete under existing laws. 

I have until lately been an owner in American and English steamers, and I know by 
experience some of the hardships we have to undergo compared to our English rivals. 

In answer to question No 3, I have to say that I would repeal all laws that now 
burden our shipping, viz: (■ustoms dues , port dues, consular charges , tonnage dues, aud 
all local dues, except a nominal fee, and I would reduce the pilotage one-lmlf. 

I would say that we could not do much better if we copied some of the English 
laws on shipping. 

In answer to question No. 4, I would say that in England shipping is not taxed. 
The dues that an English vessel has to pay are freight dues, dock dues, pilotage, and 
some nominal custom dues. 

In answer to question No. 5,1 certainly think our navigation laws should be repealed, 
and that we should take a fresh start. Our shipbuilders have had us under their 
thumbs long enough. They have simply said to us, ‘‘You must build your ships in 
our yards or you can’t have any vessels.” Who can afford to pay 30 per cent, more 
for a steamer than you can get a better steamer for in England? Only those people 
who have a monopoly can afford to build steamers in this country. Give us freedom 
to build ships or buy them in the cheapest market, with all our boasted liberty. I 
as an American have not the liberty in my country as an Englishman has in Ins. 
Give us a chance, and, mark my words, you will see our shipping interest take a start, 
and once more our flag will wave over our vessels in all parts of the world as of old. 

In answer to question No. 7, I think a rebate would not help us. We want free 
ships; liberty to buy in the cheapest market. I have been bound hand and foot too- 
long, and I demand'liberty—the same liberty as an Englishman. 


268 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


In answer to question No. 8, I have considerable to say as to some of the causes that 
have driven our flag from the east. I have reference to the China coast, when four¬ 
teen years ago we had 40 steamers owned by Americans, and sailing under the Ameri¬ 
can flag, trading on the coast and rivers of China. To-day, sir, we have one, and that 
one ere this is sailing under a foreign flag. 

1 have commanded American and British steamers for the last sixteen years, princi¬ 
pally on the China coast and out of the port of Hong-Kong; and 1 know exactly vvliat 
I am talking about as a ship-master, a ship-owner, and one who knows something 
about building iron steamers. 

Our passenger laws in the east are cumbrous aud unsatisfactory, and our consuls in 
the southern part of China and Hong-Kong have generally construed the passenger 
laws to suit themselves. Only until recently an American steamer cleat iug from Hong- 
Kong or Amoy for San Francisco or Manilla or Saigon or Singapore was obliged to pay 
our consul for clearing the ship a sum of from $2 to 50 cents for each passenger carried 
(Chinese). For instance, if I was clearing a steamer from Amoy for Manilla with 500 
Chinese deck pa sengers, the law says that these passengers must be inspected by the 
consul to see if they are going of their own free will, aud he shall charge.a fee. He 
demands 50 cents for each man, and as I only get $5 for each man I must pay him .$250 ; 
and if I make two trips per month I must pay Mr. Consul $500. As is kuown now, Mr 
Consul has been in the habit of adding these little perquisites to his salary, and several 
of them have left China rich. No wonder we change our flag, and that our Hug has 
disappeared from the China Seas. I am prepared to state before the committee many 
rascalities practiced on our shipping by our consuls in those ports. 

Another thing which prevents the American flag from sailing out of Hong-Kong. 
(Hong-Kong is an English colony.) An English steamer sailing out of Hong-Kong on 
a coasting voyage is allowed one passenger for every 9 superficial feet of space. Our 
law makes us allow each passenger 15 superficial feet. How, then, can we compete 
with English vessels? 

What ought to be is that our passenger law should be changed to suit our wants in 
foreign ports; that our consuls should be instructed to do all in their power to foster 
our shipping; that no discharged foreign sailor should be allowed three months’ pay ; 
that vessels trading in the east permanently should be exempt from all hospital dues; 
that our passenger laws should be revised at once, and that a first-rate paid consul 
should be appointed to Manilla; aud to abolish the custom of having merchant con¬ 
suls in important foreign ports. I can give the committee valuable testimony if l am 
invited to appear before them, from my long experience in connection with shipping. 

Your obedient servant, 

i EUGENE THEBAUD. 

New York, December 1 , 1882. 

To the honorable the chairman and members of the Congressional Joint Committee on the re¬ 
vival of American shipping : 

Sir and Gentlemen : The undersigned having had upwards of thirty-three years’ 
experience in connection with the shipping of New York, would respectfully submit 
the following biiet statement in regard to the questions propounded by you, viz: 

First. Why cannot this country build iron, steel, or wooden vessels as well and as 
cheaply as they are built in Scotland, England, or other countries? 

Answer. The best ships in the known world are built in this country—both wooden 
and iron ships—and, in my opinion, the reason why more American ships are not built 
to-day is largely due to a want of interest, on the part of our national legislators, in 
American shipping. 

Second. It we had such vessels without cost to us, could they be run by us in com¬ 
petition with those of other countries who build their own vessels and run them with 
their own officers and crews, without a modification or repeal of existing laws? 

Answer. The class of vessels other nations wish to furnish us are not such as would 
be preferable by our ship-owning people at any price. If we had them our maritime 
laws would need modifiyiug anyhow, aud under almost any circumstances our laws 
must be changed to warrant a healty competition. 

I bird. What, modifications of existing laws or what new laws are required to re¬ 
move discriminations against and burdens upon our shipping and ship-owning in¬ 
terests, such as customs dues, port dues, consular charges, pilotage, tonnage, and other 
dues, &c. ? 

Answer. A department of commerce and navigation, with a cabin t officer at its 
head, should be created to take charge of all matters connected with shipping. 

All consular foe systems should be abolished, and the consuls aud commercial agents 
paid salaries, lonnage dues should be further reduced and applied as per carrying 
freight capacity only of all vessels, and should be paid] on each entry of vessels en¬ 
gaged in the foreign carrying trade. Au apprentice system to the sea service saould 
be encouraged. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


269 


The pilotage question, in my opinion, should be left to be regulated by the several 
States having ports of ocean navigation. Still, the whole subject of commerce and 
navigation, and martime affairs generally, should be vested in a department, of com¬ 
merce and navigation, and a commission appointed to remodel our shipping laws. 

The United States shipping act of 1872 (Title 53, R. S.) should be repealed. This 
act alone has been a heavy tax on our shipping. In the port of New York alone since 
the inaugurat ion of the law fees to the extent of hundreds of thousands of dollars 
have been exacted from shipping, and this without any benefit to any person other 
than its administrators. (See annual reports of commissioner, on tile in the New York 
circuit court.) Under this law (Title 53, R. S.) our consuls are authorized to act as 
shipping commissioners in foreign ports, and to exact the fee of two dollars per man 
or shipping each seaman ; in addition to this, consuls exact their consular fee for cer¬ 
tifying such shipment, or, m other words, exact a fee for certifying their own acts. In 
this connection I would state that cases have come to mv notice where consuls, in the 
capacity of shipping commissioners, have appointed parties to procure the men who 
charge the ship for such service. For instance, the expense of obtaining a seaman 
under such circumstances would be : 


Agent for procuring a seaman. $2 00 

Consul, as shipping commissioner, fee.. 2 00 

Consul fee for certifying shipment. 1 00 

Total.’... 5 00 


Under the British maritime laws the cost of shipping and discharging a seaman; at 
home or abroad, is 2s. sterling, or about 46 cents in American currency. Under any 
and all circumstances this law has proved itself burdensome on shipping and on sea¬ 
men as well, and its repeal is universally clamored tor by all parties practically inter¬ 
ested in shipping. 

The existing law whereby our masters are compelled to pay three months’ extra 
wages on the discharge of each seamen in a foreign port should be repealed, and a 
system of protection to seaman, unemployed in foreign ports, adopted, similar to that 
of the British navigation, or shipping act of 1854. The law providing for the pay, 
ment of $10 per man to a home port for the passage of destitute American seamen 
should be repealed or amended so as to make it 50 cents per day per man for the actual 
time such destitute seamen are provided for on board the vessel on which they are 
brought home. 

Fourth. Compare the laws of other countries with our own with a view to their 
effect up 'ii our and their shipping and ship-owning interests. 

Answer. I he laws of some of the European nations impose what is known as light¬ 
house dues. This is particularly the case with regard to the maritime laws of Great 
Britain. An onerous tax is thus imposed on all our vessels trading to or visiting those 
ports, while such laws do not apply to the vessels of any nation visiting our waters- 
Such law, if enacted in this country (which should be the case), would create a rev¬ 
enue that might be converted to the encouragement and revival of our merchant 
marine. 

Foreign nations generally care for and tester their merchant marine. I w-ouhl re¬ 
spectfully submit that our government has not done this, therefore our laws are bur¬ 
densome on our merchant shipping; beyond this, I do not wish to go at this time. 

Fifth. Should our navigation laws be repealed or modified, and, if modified, wherein 
and for w hat purpose ? 

Answer. This question covers too much ground for me to go into, but I will say 
that, in my opinion, our maritime laws should be repealed or modified, except that 
part that prohibits the purchase of vessels abroad by our citizens, and a law should 
be enacted, or, rather, the existing law imposing import duties on material necessary 
toward the building, equipment, or outfitting of vessels, should be entirely abolished, 
or a rebate allowed. 

Sixt h. What is the cost of t he component materials of iron, steel or wooden vessels 
in other countries and our own ? 

Seventh. What would be the < ffect of a rebate on any or all such materials? 

To questions 6 and 7, I would say that I do not cons : der myself competent to give 
instructive or satisfactory replies, but have no doubt you have been furnished with 
the views of practical parties on the subject. 

Eighth. Present any other statements connected with the cause of the decline of 
the American foreign carrying trade and what remedies can be applied by legislation. 

Answer. 1 would respectfully submit that the appeals of our ship-owning people to 
Congress for redress of existing abuses and burdensome exactions has been unheard 
and unheeded. In like manner the appeals of shipmasters and seamen for redress of 
their wrongs has been unheeded, while the voices of sentimentalists and hired agents 
of foreign competitors have been seemingly all powerful in securing and retarding 
legislation affecting the interests of American ship-owners, masters, and seamen, to 






270 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


such extent, in fact, that many of onr former owners have sold off their vessel prop¬ 
erty to their more successful foreign competitors, and our shipmasters and seamen 
have been compelled to seek employment under foreign flags. It is in the power of 
Congress to remedy this state of affairs by simply listening to and acting upon the re¬ 
quests of our bona fide ship-owning people. The passage of any act prohibiting the 
payment of advance wages to seamen (as proposed in a bill now before the House) 
would, in my opinion, work very much to the disadvantage of our ships in our own 
ports, as follows: During a scarcity of seamen (which is of frequent occurrence), it 
being optional with foreign shipmasters whether they would pay advances—and 
which they would pay iu order to have dispatch—our ships would be compelled to 
wait indefinitely for men. Again, such a law would bring great hardship to the 
families of seamen, who largely depend on the advance wages of the father or hus¬ 
band for sustenance during his absence. 

All of which is respectfully submitted. 

Very respectfully your most obedient servant, 

JAMES J. FERRIS. 

At ‘2.30 p. m. the committee adjourned to meet in the Senate Commerce Committee 
room, at Washington, Saturday, December 2, 1882, at 2 o’clock p. m. 


Statement showing the tonnage of vessels entered at seaports of the United States each year from 1840 to 1885 , inclusive, distinguishing between American and 

foreign vessels, and between sailing and steam vessels. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 271 


a 

o 

H 


a 

<v 

4-5 

c n 


X 

% 

X 

X 

> 


eta: 

r-H # 

X 
<D 
V 


a 


a 


co o n rf rf o 05 d: co n »o cc ^ m to x w ri ^ co o ^ i - ^ h o a: *o a x rt' 

^ x ^ as o ^ i' ’t ^ :o x o m r: m oo c: x o ri x x x m x x Ci x Tf o m o 

^xcoocshocj oaoi—ir-ico^ossooiooiOQo — o m -t ^ oj .-o »c ci h -o a r-. cs 

2 co of r-T cf»*-7 ofof o'co* o o' ;o"cf ad ^ofad cd o'* of »-f id rf o' od o' r-T o' r#Tofo'edird 

^ G o O O^H NNOfli-O?H0Tl<h©TjiMMOL'5OOONOOhW^aOfl)O^H 
^t'M>COCOOOrflf5Q00^05riCOHTf<X«OiOiOHWriCCOWif50(N05hMOHL'' 

r-1 H H ri r-l (M Ol of Ol CO CO cd ^ T*f t*T rd "rf rd id •*+ Tt Tf -d CO l/f id id O O o' t> X o" of of 


«© 

O* 

£ 


x> 

2 


<50 


CIO50OHXCC05W©«©MWC505^hif5WOMOOC0©O'tTt<O 

I' X 05 CO h 7 •+ X' w »t I - 7 M « Tt 05 H X O O --t’COOOOr^Ol'-L.OO 

O t-)<WC}OO7OTj<C0X8'OHOTj'i0Nn7Oi-GCXrHONinXTfC 

rjTco ad cd cf of cf rd <^f r-T id id* tjT co" o' *-T od of of o' of o' o tf co" co" r4 © of 

<M Ol lO 05 00 O Ol CC O ^fi CC O o Ol CO O -* X »0 O Ol r- C5 f— O OC ^ OJ CC r-l 

H Ol 0-1 Ol Ol CO ^ Tf i(0 O O ^ O X X CO O 00 05 »o o H CO Ol 


- H rH ri M C) CO r. *** -* Tf 


O l 01 ■** CO 01 CC -*t O — CO o 
O lO O h Ci G O -f O 

»0 Ol Tt |> x TJ 1 c co X 


^ N O O H G 


. ... ^ ^ ^ r , . - - ^GOC0Tt<C5W<MC5O-X 

WXCOC1HXWNOXCO Cl<MfH^OOt-CMCO*-«^COOOCO 
i0dC0O05OO.G'<1'OC|ir.MSOXHOMl>Nt>OC0 


CH^ CO I' X O CC iO ^ ^ H Cl X X 1.0 O X I' ro x Tf X CO Tf< H CO o o cope X o 

05 O C5 O O w O O X O X -- 1.0 G rri^. (N C5 X h-f 'i' O rfn.O CO X iO bt iO 05 

XOO^^GOCOGXOXHCOXCCCOO^iCMOOCGOGCOiC'OOXCJ 

r-T of r-T t*" of o f 0 f co" co" co" -$f cd Tf" rd co" rd co" co" co" co" of cd co" co" T*i" co" rd Tt io" rd irf 




OlOOOr-XCOCSOlCJOO^OlCJCi^^incOOCOOOXOO-t^OiOi^O 

I- X O c: O. X ’t O. --Tt o Ol O -- X O O I- ^ O vC o L- O t- ic o 

iOl>TfOl05000lO’^WX'^OHO^iOC3HO)0’^t'COXH05CliflX^lO 

rf cd x" -4“ cd © of © *«■* of *-f id" id rf cd © ^ i-f ad r>^ of oi © of :d cf t>f cd cd of 

01 Ol '•'i C5 X O CH." X 05 *t X O O M CO O ^ X O O Cl ri 05 O X Tf' Cl X r- 

r-! Ol 01 Ol Ol CO lC © © t* © X X CO <© X © O © —i CO Ol 


MHHHOlCJCOJC^rtTj' 


-I ® 

£ © 

tek • 

X 


© 
c 3 
fc .2 

X 


<x> 

X 


Co 

pd 

o> 



dOOOl^^OlHt^rfOXiOiOXOOXOO. OCOO. OX-»t-tS*XXXMM 
t^XC5«OOOOCOTj<TjiHiOI'^H»Ht>i0 4 l CO^ifJCIHr-0«»0001CHC 
ic t-HdCCX^Olt^tCOriCCXGOCC'COiC^LOr'r-.t'OJG^CCCOH^O 

^ ^ cd x" —f cf © of id of r—T ©" o" of of —*" od of © of of of of ©" of *-T ,-T iff of of 

w ©*©* ©* Cl M O G *X1 O CO lO Cl Cl X iri ^ c: r- O ^ CS -t co curt G X X ^ G X H 

H p-( h p- H Cl Cl W M rji ^ t' O O 71 CC ic CO x CO X C'M CO 


H rt n H H f-i Cl Ol CO CO CO 


£ x 
£ © 
o > . 

• pH X 
M flrH 

<D C <D 

£ c3 x 

£ © 


◄ X 


£ 


o© 

oSS 


•c> -C> 


•»t p-< H X »C lO O X X H W X Ci ^ O t- - co O Cl CO t' O CIO -+ M 
^OXXO}OCOt>OCCOXO-COCOMW-MOIOiOCl-'05^COrH 
OXHP-XOOt^t>H^ O-^XU50OlOCO«OOiXTriCO5Ht»l>iC 

of ©" of r4 x r o" cf »d -t -f exf r-" o of x" cd co" cf od o —* i> cd h — cd id r-T o 

H ci H O M *t CC G Cl O O Cl ^ X O iC r- o O. O H CO X ^ N CO ^ o 
h ^ M f-1 Cl Cl M Ol 04 Cl Hr-NClCO’t’tXl-XXOHH 


XOt>T*<<MCl'^COClX^COHMCOOU5 0^C100Ht>H^NOC0^05W(N050-'X 
TtX^HO'OCH-05l^O^OCOXMClHXCOr'-05»COClClHTtXl>CI?:HrfXXCO 
^ X O O Ol lO Cl G X ^ O W X O M .T. O 05 O Ol G Tf o Cl LC M O O X <n o Cl G Ol G O CC 


SXOHOClt^COf^XClXiC- 
<Oloi^cocoo coo’f oino: 
5>|t't>t^XXOQ^^t-OiCOt' 


Tt H ci X x O X G CO X ^ ^ X .*0 H CO O ^ M X X o 
cc co cc n ic r- rf ci c: io x r- ^ io o co x io x io a 

XOXriCOXfCCCCOiOOOl'sOOl'CGMiOOCCXCl 



- N O O. ^ ^ o 7 O O if: O C- O CC O X Cl O G O Cl Cl Cl C5 - ON X CO O O M C5 

.o G G Cl H O Cl CO Ol O lO O O O O Cl -i 1 CO *t O H iO 1C X O 1C C LC O w O X O rH CO 

SH^^lOrt'COCOCOO^CQHOlCOCOCOCO O.^H OOOIMHHCOMnOXGClHLOXOXH^ 

»—<i— 1 T — 1 ' 1—t f —iHr IT— (^4*— if-II— ir-if—i rIrli -1 of rH r-H t—< of of Ol CO CO CO CO 


■rt' to 
O Ol H 
oi O <M ift 

^ o* co" of 
h Oooc: 
H oi co oi 


Tj<COOOC010 0 005HOOM>OiOLCiOOOlT}<OC]<OiO^OT|<OCOiQOG 
X G H H o X X " Tf X 05 X H O CO r. o O X h C OJ i< 7 h Tt t' » CO o Ol H -O 
TfOOMOlOCOOOGOkOTfiCXt'O^X^OOlOlHOG^GOGOHTtCl 


Ol 


8 e e 


kOXMCOd010rf01fHl>^XOIOC10- 
O X X w X O 05 O ^ ”f X »Q X 50 X rf< O L 
OJOICOCO^^^OOiCO^L^-t^OiOlCCi—1C 

^ HHrf r-f »H r-T 1 -f I-T of of Ol" Ol" of CO" Ol" CO" CO" Ol" Ol" of i-T r-f r-f t-h" Ol" Ol" r-T r-T r-T r-T r-f r-T |H 


O r- Ol ‘O CO O CO 1 —I O Ol Cl CO Oi lO 
— ^OOOOiOO'^HCl'thG'tCl 
X in Ol lO rf »0 G OOOXGlOXGX 


o 

CO 

© 


© 

£ 

© 

- 

a 

V 

H 


oHd^^ioot-xoiOr-oico^mot'-xoo-'ciw^'inohxaoHOicc^Lnco 

232J2I^£U^^;o»oioioio»oioiOioiocoo©«occo©«o(Ocit-t-Nt-t-^t- 

S<SSS 3 ooaoaoaoa>aoooaoQoaoooaoaoooaocoooaoooooaooooo»oooo 5 oooooooaooo 


a Includes both sailing and steam vessels. b Steam vessels not separately reported. 





























































































































Statement showing the tonnage of vessels entered at sea-ports of the United States each gear from J840 to 1882, inclusive , 4 c*—Continued- 


9 79 

I — 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


< 


O 

H 


Xt^OOOJHOJ 
X (M W . i 05 
t? i.c ri o: »d -h 

cc x cT x"o' x" 
i o cc cc 
S -r ID t- 71 x x 


£h o'—" 


CO ID »D ^ 





o 

H 

CO 

CD 

X 



• 


o 

X 

o 

71 

X 

71 


CO 


ID 

ID 

—f 

O 

X 

X 

c 


oo 






C3 


<-S 

H 

O 

T—1 


r- 

o 

© 

Cfi 

es 

71 

r - 1 

X 

X 

71 

71 

H 

tfi 

<v 


ID 

CO 

T 

ID 

L- 

M> 

k 


-7 

ID 

CD 

tx 

x" 

X 




X 

CD 

ID 

CO 

CO 

71 

tl 

• 


oc 

H 

CO 


id 


X 


X 

C5 

l— 

CO 

X 

**7 

a 

• r-* 

3 

Oo 

p*a 


o" 

cd" 

-H 

7l" 

x" 

r—i 

0 ? 

Cj 

X 

rH 

X 

CD 

o 

CO 

15 

CD 

£ 

X 

74 

71 

X 

o 

*H 

xn 

k 


ID 

CD 

1 > 

lx 

X 

X 


c? 

o 


OHWCXt- 
D X o (N X Cl 
. lD iD rf O CD O 
oo ~ 

2* t*« O — 11 t— O 

§ Cl - » X Cl 71 
• ID CO »D O ‘D 




o * 

* 

Ci) r* 

^ £ © 

oS® 


X 

a cd 

bl k 

•r-> , 

<d bl* 

S*s 

*2 

C3 

X 


"3 


a X 

CC ^ 


t- 

<D 

e 

<i 


u-2 


c3 


o 

CO 

<D 

a 


70 

£> 

HD 

a 

0> 

c3 

o 

H 


cc 


'-r ID CD t- X CO 


t^r^^ooi'" 

CC CD 71 *-• CO 
rf rf 6 H H Cl 


p: 7 i 7i o i — t - co 
Sect- CD o X X 

- Tt r-; D CC rH 


ex 


CO ^ ID 


C- t> 


_, . 

CO x o x o 


o —1 ‘0 O 1 - X 


. H r- Q lO h» 

.a ^ * 

ac . ~ ~ 


~ 71 X X iD C X 

® a <3> 

6 7 CC H 7 7 ID 

P CS e» 

^ O r—t *—« r-i CM CO 

5 a? 

4-> 

ri rH rH rH rH —< 

'H Cfc 





X 

X 

ID 

00 

CO 

71 



o 

-7 


o 

»D 

IH 



X 

X. 

£- 

CO 1 

X 


a 

05 

£ 

r — 1 

CD 

X 

rt* 

71 

X 

o 

o 

X 

.— 

X 

X 

O 

CO 

H 

&1 

X 

71 

71 

X 

05 

rH 



id" 

x" 

t> 

r> 

w» 

x" 


Co 

i 

£ 


o cc C ^ Cl Cl 
— 71 uo co x t'- 
C1 X Tt O Cl D. 

x" cc id" o" h<" *** 

-f 17 Cl Cl 71 

O CO 00 1^ 71 ID 

-H ^ »D" »0 iD tJi 


Cc 

ex. 


X WiDCHO 
X 71 CC O I- O 
CD CO 71 CM iD ID 

»D rI H Tt" X r-r 
w I- CC rt* I- >— 1 

X X 05 05 X X 


t — X C5 O —< 71 

i— t'- i> xxx 

X X X X X X 





















































No. 139 .—Tonnage of American and foreign sailing and steam vessels cleared from seaports of the United States for foreign coun tries , from 1864 to 1882, 

inclusive. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


273 


c3 

© 

+-> 

m 

P 

d 


c8 

00 

r-H 

a 

4-n 

o 

H 


© 

© 

© 

© 

t f) 

P 

P 

P 

O 

H 


o 

CO 

© 

p 

p 

►"3 

© 

p 

p— 

C5 

© 


c3 

4-> 

O 

H 


p 

tX 

•r-t 

© 

o 

£ 


MHWCCHXCONCOOOOOOTfHOt^NOO 

C0C0C0XC0C0dOiDt>lD05iD05C0050505CD 

CHCOO’^ClWOOOt-'OOOOTMCCP^Oirp 

=c oT cTo © r-Tr-Tt>Tx*TjTcc'o'oTx*co*co* id* co*cd* 
gl'-COOOHr-iCOHCOHiO^COaO'tHOJOi^ 
OdrtHiOOOHCOOt^^OCCX.^OOOC'l^CO 

^ r*T id" id" id" co «d* cc r>" x" cT oT cT© rH* co id id 


ID 
. 05 

Cc , 

I- 


Ht-CQOXOHt^C5t'»OCOCOCCCCMCO 

worrwHoaHXcscoo^H^c^cj 

' ©" I-H ©** CD d" d drH* © CO 05* N ID* r-" ID* Tt<* ©" 
Ttr^Clr-<OXC4HC50<NX««OOCH^C5 

(M C4X co" cc" co" co" id" id" t-" cc <c" t-" X* o" d* d rH* 


p 

a 

© 

•C 

© 

g 


p 

+-> 

o 

H 


Cc 

s 

£ 


dOlOCCHOXHHHW^^XHt-^Tfd 
aocoiocicooci^ndOiOccioojcodTjin 
NCOI>OOdiOXCOH««H^W^lf3 0 


dODO^WD^L^TjiH^NCOCD-Ht-ClO 
CC —. d t>» dOdCOC5t^CCCDCOTtiC5t^C^COCO 
CO^OdCCiCiOCCOiOCJOOCHOOOO 

r-T r-T d" d" d" d d~ d d d" d" cc" co co" co* co" CO* CO* d 


HOJX^HHHMDCCCCXt^ 
CO'^dCCrHCCCOlDCCiDT^COCO 
. OCOdCOdiDr-•cccooo^c©*^ 

£ 7* ^ ^ ^ w^OCCDNXDXX-tdDCX 
S SSSSc.5© OCOWOH©HnCH^f 
^ TfCOOt^COCO^iDCO^tiDt-CC 

of d* co" co" rf rt* Tf Tt* io cc* t>* oo* oo* 


CO 



© 



GO 



CC 

EL 

• 

© 

bJC 

cc 

k 

g 

•rH 

© 

Ph 

o 

P 

c$ 

© 

44* 

in 



• 



e C3 55 $ S3 


OM^HHiOCddCO^W^ 
Hxacocid^wTjicohccx 
05xxcc©^05 05©dcc©d 

'J? r-* id" d* d* cc co* r-* id* co" o* cc* oT 
SoHa-MocoHiflcoDot^a 
coxwxdHco^Hdrt^d 

1-7 r-T d* d* CO* CO* co" CO* Tf" ID* cc* t-" o" 


p 

D 

© 

•rH 

u 

© 

g 

◄ 


P 

+-» 

o 

H 


HCOT^COOCCdlDCOCOlDlDCO 
d cc CO O d O CC ID d d l> L'* ID 
. Ht»WOdHdQW«)t't'H 

Cc __ A ^ ... . 

?: t* sT 7^ e d o co l* ^ o c ci h d x oo 

O CCCCwCd X H x cc O « id M O O 1 C 

^ X t'* X X O rH r-i rH rH r—I r—> d CO 


cc 

£ 


l-COOCCOXI^t-CCT^^Of-* 

C5iOCOCOCOC©l"-COC©COiOiOCO 

iDi-HUOdXr-idt-dXdr-lO 


^ 8 8 N ^ d 05 l'“ — 05 05 CO d 

~ c 03 <3 c ~ h it o c: m ci h d o w 


t- x 

t- 05 

XC0CDXCD©'**XlDdl>©i—I 
CO* T^* t** ID* ID ID* ID* CD t-7 t-* r-»* cc" 


OQ 

^© 



03 

OQ 

© 

P 

bX 

«c 


• rH 
© 

p 

tx 

Ph 

O 

rP 

p 

• rH 
rH 
•rH 

3 

Ph 


• 



OXCOXCCOt-^XOdOd 
d ID rHiOdl>C0O5t>©O5t» 
r— O d d 05 C5 H ID O n CO CO CD 


. CC CC ID H 05 X X X iD *"-« l— d 
rH-^Xi-Hl>i-«^XTj'dXdCD 

of d* d* co co co co" co" ^r" id* id" id* t*T 


P 

3 

a 

• rH 

P 

a> 

2 

<3 


GC 

s 




ID 
T#< O 

t-*o* 


t-XMX 

t--X rr 

d O X d 


CO X ^ 05 05 05 
O cC CC r#* CC iD 
CD 05 t> CO 


d 


TfC5C5r-Ht > »OiPXX 

^ooxxoorocO'T't 

t^Xt-CCXX 0505005 

HrlHrir'riHHC'ln 


05 


X cc 

05 l- 
L- ID 


-ftlDCCI>X050rHdCO , ^iDCCt^X050r-Jd 

o cb c c c o t- t- t'— p* x x x 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 


<£> 

p 

pH 

p 

Pi 

0) 

ao 

0) 

PH 

O 

ft 

pH 

o 

p 

© 

if 

oo 

»-H 

© 

a? 

co 

© 

g 

3 

© 

a? 

P 

P 

bX» 

P 


cc 

(X 

© 

rP 

a? 

p- 

c8 

© 

© 

OQ 

© 

rP 

4^ 

bJD 

P 

• rH 

P 

P 

P 

8 


0C7-18 

* 


































































































































274 AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 

No. 1.— Value of merchandise imported into and exported from the l nited States from 1 935 
to 1882, inclusive; also, annual excess of imports or of exports. (Specie values.) 


Year ended— 


Exports. 


Domestic. Foreign. 


Total exports. 


Imports. 


Excess 
of exports 
over 
imports. 


Excess 
of imports 
over 
exports. 


September 30— 

1835 . 

1836 . 

1837 . 

1838 . 

1839 . 

1840 . 

1841 . 

1842 . 

June 30— 

1843*. 

1844 . 

1845 . 

1846 . 

1847 . 

1848 . 

1849 . 

1850 . 

1851 . 

1852 . 

1853 . 

1854 . 

1855.. 

1856 . 

1857 . 

1858 . 

1859 . 

1860.... 

1861. 

1862. 

1863 . . 

1864 . 

1865 ... 

1866 .. 

1867 .. 

1868 . 

1869 .. 

1870 . 

1871 .. 

1872 .. 

1873 .. 

1874 . 

1875 . 

1876 .. 

1877 . 

1878 .. 

1879 .. 

1880 .. 

1881.. 

1882. 


Dollars. 

100, 459, 481 
106, 570, 942 

94, 280, 895 

95, 560, 880 
101,625, 533 
111, 660, 561 
103, 636, 236 

91,799, 242 

77, 686, 354 
99,531,774 
98, 455, 330 

101, 718, 042 
150, 574, 844 

130, 203, 709 

131, 710, 081 
134, 900, 233 

178, 620, 138 
154, 931, 147 
189, 869, 162 
215, 328, 300 
192, 751,135 
266, 438, 051 
278, 906, 713 
251, 351, 033 

278, 392, 080 
316, 242, 423 
204, 899,616 

179, 644, 024 
186, 003, 912 
143, 504, 027 
136, 940, 248 
337, 518, 102 

279. 786, 809 
269, 389, 900 
275,166, 697 
376,616, 473 
428, 398, 908 
428, 487, 131 
505, 033, 439 
569, 433, 421 
499, 284,100 
525, 582, 247 
589, 670, 224 
680, 709, 268 
698, 340, 790 
823, 946, 353 
883, 925, 947 
733, 239, 732 


Dollars. 
14, 756, 321 
17, 767, 762 
17,162, 232 
9,417, 690 

10, 626, 140 
12, 008, 371 

8, 181, 235 
8, 078, 753 

5,139. 335 

6, 214, 058 

7, 584, 781 
7, 865, 206 

6, 166, 754 

7, 986, 806 

8, 641,091 

9, 475, 493 
10,295, 121 

12, 053, 084 

13, 620,120 
21, 631, 260 
26. 158, 368 

14, 781, 372 
14, 917, 047 
20, 660, 241 
14, 509, 971 
17, 333, 634 

14, 654,217 

11, 026, 477 
17, 960, 535 

15, 333, 961 
29, 089, 055 

11, 341, 420 
14, 719, 332 

12, 562, 999 
10, 951, 000 
16,155, 295 

14, 421, 270 

15, 690, 455 

17, 446, 483 

16, 849, 629 
14, 158, 611 
14, 802, 424 
12, 804, 996 
14, 156, 498 
12, 098, 651 
11,692, 305 

18, 451, 399 

17, 302, 525 


Dollars. 
115, 215, 802 
124, 338, 704 
111,443, 127 
104,978, 570 
112,251, 673 
123, 668, 932 
111,817. 471 
99, 877, 995 


82, 825, 689 

105, 745, 832 

106, 040, 111 
109, 583, 248 
156, 741,598 
138, 190, 515 
140, 351, 172 
144, 375, 726 
188, 915, 259 
166, 984, 231 
203, 489, 282 
236, 959, 560 

218, 909, 503 
281,219, 423 

293, 823, 760 
272, Oil, 274 
292, 902, 051 
333 576,057 

219, 553, 833 
190, 670, 501 
203, 964, 447 
158, 837, 988 
166, 029, 303 
348, 859, 522 

294, 506, 141 
281, 952, 899 
286, 117, 697 
392, 771, 768 
442, 820, 178 
444, 177, 586 
522, 479, 922 
586, 283, 040 
513, 442, 711 
540, 384, 671 
602, 475, 220 
694, 865, 766 
710, 439, 441 
835, 638, 658 
902, 377, 346 
750, 542, 257 


Dollars. 
136, 764, 295 
176, 579, 154 
130, 472, 803 

95, 970, 288 
156, 496, 956 

98, 258, 706 
122, 957, 544 

96, 075, 071 

42, 433, 464 
102, 604, 606 
113, 184, 322 
117, 914, 065 
122, 424, 349 
148, 638, 644 
141, 206,199 
173, 509, 526 
210, 771, 429 
207, 440, 398 
263, 777, 265 
297, 623,. 039 
257, 808, 708 
310, 432, 310 
348, 428. 342 
263, 338, 654 
331, 333, 341 
353, 616,119 
289, 310, 542 
189, 356, 677 
243, 335, 815 
316, 447, 283 
238, 745, 580 

434, 812, 066 
395, 761, 096 
357, 436, 440 
417, 506, 379 

435, 958, 408 
520, 223, 684 
626, 595, 077 
642,136, 210 
567, 406, 342 
533, 005, 436 
460, 741,190 
451, 323, 126 
437, 051, 532 
445, 777, 775 
667, 954, 746 
642, 664, 628 
724, 639, 574 


Dollars. 


9, 008, 282 


25,410,226 


3,802,924 

40, 392, 225 I 
3,141, 226 i 


34, 317, 249 


8, 672, 620 


1,313, 824 


18, 876, 698 


79, 643, 481 
151, 152, 094 
257, 814, 234 
264, 661, 666 
167, 683, 912 
259, 712, 718 
25, 902, 683 


Dollars. 
21, 548,493 
52, 240, 450 
19, 029, 676 


44, 245, 283 


11, 140, 073 


7, 144,211 

8, 330, 817 


10, 448,129 
855, 027 
29, 133, 800 
21, 856, 170 
40, 456,167 
60, 287, 983 
60, 663, 479 
38, 899, 205 
29, 212, 887 
54, 604, 582 


38, 431, 290 
20, 040, 062 
69, 756, 709 


39, 371, 368 
157, 609, 295 
72, 716, 277 
85, 952, 544 
101, 254, 955 
75, 483, 541 
131, 388. 682 
43, 186, 640 
77, 403, 506 
182, 417, 491 
119, 656, 288 

19, 562, 725 


*Niue months from September 30, 1842, to June 30, 1843. 
























































































































FOREIGN CARRYING TRADE. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


75 


Q © 

& > 
<1 '7 

►3 £ 


<v 


o 


W M 

_ oo 
*0 00 
HH ^ 

c3 q 

M ^ 

££ O 

^ 00 • 

w ^ ^ 
—- ^ 
ri QJ 

r—• , 

o ^ 

#n„?h 

^ o 

© a 

> <1 • r -‘ 

•43 W a 

gk.2 

131 

i o —' 

'J1 r-j 

- M i 
rs Llj s 

02 ^ cS 

• r-H 

* r—< 

S ^ 2 

eg c8 •£ 
^ o> Q 
O o 

bJD ^ 
fl 0) 


-p rfj 


Tfl 

w 

H 

<j S 
H w 2 

02 m ~, 

i-5 P 


® f3 
W m 

a i 


<x> 


SO 

P! 

W 


£ 

® 4 M 

d h 31 


3 W 

k 




O 
fa ^ 

3 < 

~ Q 


02 

^ - 

53 — 

Pj s 
>4 c3 


P3 

W 




^5 

«rH 

■tf J - 

a h .s 

«S DQ _- 

w -2? 




g 

HH 'W 

b-H 

H ©> W 


© 

+-> 

4-1 

© 

W 

© 

h2 

> 


C4 

W 

§ 


rh 

'w 1 

<1 

CH 

£ 


<| w 

Q 

P P3 

' cj 
02 0-1 
S 

i-5 
O 


© 


CO w 
CO W 


© 

£ 


> 


t> 


02 

bC fl 
fl • rH 

ll 


fl 

fl 

O 

• i—i 

Sh 

02 


O fn 

u u 
v fl ^ 


X 


0} 

P—* 

02 

X 

CO 

02 

k 


00 

Sh 

pH 


* 

w 

a 

<1 

02 

H 

rv» 


J 

◄ 


02 

H 

(V» 

l-H 

o 

w 


oo 

H 

S5 

O 

Cu 


H 50 
c t: 

£< O 

G pH 

.fl X 

r-H © 

fl rrt 
+•> fl 

o p 
H - 


»p^ 
© , 
r-> 

.o 


eg 


o 

•H 

X 



02 

02 


X 

#-H 

X 


02 


k 

P 


HH 



g a » 

^ fl G 

CO ^ ^ 

pH *rH 

fl 02 -fl 
« 43 © 

a-S ^ 


S) . 

‘S * 

pH 

.O CO 
^ 00 
02 


fl 

.2 * 

S CO 
3 co 
02 
> 




Efl 

fl 


fl CO 
fl 02 


02 


CO ^ 

fl 02 rfl 
^ rfl 0) 


fl 

Cl; 

•r-< 

02 

P- 

o 


fl 

w 


CO 

"3 

CO 

CO 

02 

k 


C5WWHOt>^H^Wi0^iC»C^GNiCI>air.WO^JOt>N02H 

c<i co oi t> oo r-H »-3 r- »o m ^i d ci d io d co d io 6 h ^ d cc ic 

X X 00 G X X G G t- L" t- t- CG L- l> L^ CO CG lO ^ ^ -M CO CC CO 


lCOr-©.HOWOCC2XMHi*^CC©COH'M©0Tf'W^{O(NHN 
®xwr^00t-'^«0ir. iftM^NOH©ifiMh.OW©HOMOlOCi^ 
Tj»OiCOWCHM^ON005WCOT}'MXXiOOiOOb*»flOOJ>f5MQ 


cc 


t - r- r© 

©i cr. io 


O H 

o c©> o 

H0O 


oi>hcommo^oio^o r- oo »c © x tfl ©q co o 

CO CO CO r-, ©0 pH »fl »fl Ci ©1 O »fl Ifl’ tfl CO 05 r-H ©no r -1 co ©1 ©1 

pH oo O CO O C© O O ©I cc CO 00 ©1 to ©1 C5 l> 05 CC ^ C5 O to 


^ ©1 t - 00 

c -t” of —**o^ofco'o'^t^od't-r® 

rs, ©t'rtOHt — C©C©®®®COC©'—®I^CO^©l 

^ ©i ©j ©a ph ©i ©i © I co co <m co rf t*i ^ io io co i> 


C© t - to ©1 rt< Ifl> -* 05 o ao 

C O O X CO CO C O r-U> Tf 

CO COt'-tO^tOCOCOOCOOO 


®iocccc®r^toc©®^^rHt^i>.iO'-tco®t-^c©oo 

1C to H ^2 1^ -O © © X io H r- h h o G © •© H a h 
X ^ fl I- X ©1 © © X ©. 05 X ’C X ©. io L- ©1 ©1 L- ©1 


O-HX-trH-t ^ 
05 C© ©1 C5 ® 

©i ® to n ® O ® 


£ Nh* co ^ O. ® pH CO Lfl' I- -rf to" of r> rH of CO of CO* ® 

SO©ff©t'*0©l©lC©©?C}«OOpHC©OiCOWH»H 

5 co t ■ 


I O O »C C ©J *0 t- ifl ©1 ©1 IO r-H c© tfl 


® X tfl CO C© O CO ©1 co 
^ r- -h »o 05 —> ©i ©j 
® 00 O • r ® ® O ©1 ® tfl 


O C5 


co “-t r- ©i ©j co ® ©a ® cc c© ©4 ® 

fl fl 't © »T X G I'* 03 H ©4 »fl 


— ® C© O ® tfl C© 00 C© Ifl' t'- Ifl ® O 

fl fl H CO ©I I© O TH ^ X fl X X io 

1-1 pH ©4 rH ©1 ©4 ©4 ©1 CO fl' ® tfl Ifl 


Co 

io 

f^O 

o 


OO C©COO5©ltfl®f-HC0HO5 
tfl C© ©l fl 71 if h* - 1 fl >4 ^ X 
©4CD®C0ifl>^rHC005ri®C0 


t-- ©4 CO ©4 ©4 n- CO CO ©4 C© OC »-h 05 CO CO i—< 00 

fl O O W CO fl X Ifl O fl H © © fl CO I© if 

C5 co ©4 tfl 00 ©1 05 05 CO CC 00 CO 


©ioococo®©i®o:t^coioco 

©JO© lOfl'tflXflMHfl 

COXXO^GtC^COtOCDit 


co oo ©i ® ifl it — ©i ©4 r-H 05 h oo co 

t- ©1 ©) t.O fl H fl H X t- ©4 ©1 H H ^ X H 

'ij* ® CO ©4 ©4 ©1 ^ CO ® 05 •-© r—< 00 ® CO IT* ® 


tfl -rr 

O 05 


05 tfl CO CO CO C© 05 ® 05 ©4 
I>»c0t>0000®®®05tfl 


05 tfl — CO ©1 r^ CO 05 05 05 ifl ©1 ©4 CO C© 05 »fl 

C© ifl 05 ® CO ifl t'- t'" ©1 CO ® 05 n L"“ !>■ 

pH rH pi ©4 ©4 ©4 ©4 ©4 ©4 rH pH rH pH ©4 rH H 


CC 

e 

r-o 

N» 

o 

C5 


cc 

PO 

ISJ 

o 

C; 


r- ® 

co ® 

pH CO 


h- 'Tfi ©4 CO 
O ©4 CO co ©1 
DO 05 CO O CO 


HOt^flOXMrHOOHH ©4®C0O5®DC®C0»flCO 
DO 05 CO t- X 1 X ©1 ©4 ©4 CO CO ® 05 05 ©4 iH n CO CO f©. CO 
©4 CO ©4 ©1 CO CO CO 00 CO Tt< Oi H (>• CO © CO CO CO tfl t>- O tfl 


OH , t^r-.oOfl'H-HtOHTtX©NCOt^flflH < HOr- 
CO ©4 CO CO © pi 'DO ® tfl t'- CO t'- C© ©HflOt>H-tOO©, 
COt^Ttt'-©4CO®^C0^-ttfl®©4rH©4©I^O5CO©HHi^ 


P 

<12 

© 

rC 

tc 


ci 


c 

P 

<12 

P 

a 

X 

o 


bC 

P 

•rH 

>5 

pH 

rH 

P 

o 

X 

3 

X 

X 

02 


GflC©H©lCOXt-fltflH<©l'^N05©lH'l^H<ri^roOHCO©4Ht>fl O 

© rH O Pi C ©I H r O L- X fl O ©I fl CO t- M O X fl X H X fl CO X b- J 
•OtflC0t0©405C005pH©l©©4r*ir— tfl’H^©4©COCOl>Ci-i^^T^aOOOCOiO h— 

r> - 

^ H* © t' fl Ifl © X © fl fl ©1 ti fl X <© X H PH P-. N CO fl W H Cl r- X rH ^H 

^v©4cc^©i©4DctAro®p-u^©rcpi©cccococ5'H'r*^H®t^®©r-Ha50o o 

G3^©C0©C0C0tflC0C005©4pHl>l>©T#<©4C0rHr>*©ltflO0C©Tti|>0505 

fl X X X IO ©4 05 Cl O X © © O O O Ifl ©1 © H fl N r- rH H« t- A O +- 

N05©C0H!'-X©ifl©lflHC5H©©Xp^TtC0©XH'tXC0©lC505 \Z1 

H 71 p h H r-. H M 75 Cl ©1 fl Cl fl H rt H fl H- fl fl Cl ©4 n h fl ©4 ©1 

* a 

o 

• * 1 • ' • * • •••••••*•'•••••*• »H 

• • • •••• l • I .«••••«•••■• t •(•• • -+-» 

• • ' •.•'■■>••'•••■■••■•••••'•< P 

cc i i i p 

^ I . .'!!!!! 

5 I::::::::::::::::::::: : 2 

•s ^ 

Q. ....!.!!!!! of 

i • ..... ..... ... 4H 

• I •.••»••*•«••• • t . pH 

• • • ■ .. .• • • • o 

pH 

O5iflp-i^t'-il<r-‘©4©t>O5©4C5tATfiT#'COtAC0O5i*©t'-pH©00a0C5pH 
CO CO pH pi CO ifi pi © 05 T 1 ©4 tfl ifl CC ifi ©1 CO ■© 05 CO CO 05 CO CO ©4 CO 05 02 

•COpitflCCifl’—lCO©l©lCOCOCO^CO©©4piCOT-ntACO^*COCOtfltA<©05Tt< 

^ fl fl X ©4 fl H< X ©4 H- ©I fl p- p- ^ H- O C5 fl fl H Q ©4 © ©4 © H- © CD «i 

® o -t ©. a -t © fl fl t- ©i x fl x h- i- © co h< fl fl h x ^ co fl o x hh 

S rf< © t- I- G X wfl C4 ©1 02 pi ©. C5.JP L-piH©flflX^Xt-COX £ 

O - ~ - 02 

fl CO N rf ©. Cl O H< H 1 Lfl ©| fl © fl H< H Tt< ri -H rH C2 it CJ M H C2 p- G 
H©i©4©iPico©i©4tflTt^tfl©t^t-cor'-©i—co©©i©®©co®tflt^o 5 

pH Pi pi rH pH ©4 ©4 CO ©4 CO © 


© 

rH 

05 

rH 

©f 

& 

02 


O 

G 


HH 

o 


tfl © © pH ©4 © 
r- »fl r- ©l tfl 
H CC H it V CO 


PH ^ ^ 


p 

s 

C2 

•2 k 

al3 

£ X 
02 
k 




CO © CO ©1 CO © © © 

CO ©4 ©4 CO tfl ifl t- CO »C © 


r-H CO ©3 —t* CO CO CO ^ CO © 00 

©t-'MflflHTt^NflCH' 
pH ' rH rH pH r—l rH ©4 p^ CC CO ©4 


Oo 

*1 

NJ 

p-i 

O 


©4 © tfl CO rH co ©4 ©4 CO CO »fl CO ® ©4 © © CO tfl ifl © © n- © la © tfl 

Ifl CO CO tfl fl ifl pf 1* © ©4 © pH pH ©4 ifl A © X tfl H © CO ©4 

COX©4X©^rHfl©lH©flrtflC4©.tflH©TtX©Hfl©Hfllfl^ 


©4 

© 

X 


pH , p'itXXiGNt^©XX©itC4©©COH'H'’titClfl©v. fl 
©4©)Nflfl© T tH-xflflflxr^flflrio©jO'tt^itHXit©© 
74 [H © PH H © H © fl © © ©1 co fl ©1 © - H pH fl ©1 tn 71 fl © 04 © 


<12 


-T br 


■NflX©if©4©flX©©flflp*fl©4©©fl , CXp-«©l©-it©Ui©l 
© pp X rf © ©.© H©4CJCOCCfl©H©Ttifl©-'C4©©©XtiHHCl 
rH h'pH pH PI r-^ pH pi pi —1 ©4 ©4 © 1 ©1 ©4 ©4 ©4 ©4 r-H p^ pH rl 


X ^ o 

S^3 

fl o ^ 


co 

v. 

NJ 

o 


^ &H 

r 1 ^ 


© h ci fl H .fl © X © C H 7) fl if fl © X 
, . , . fl fl fl fl ifl fl O fl i.7 fl CO © © © © CO © © CO 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 


fl 


o^©ico^tfl©r^x© 
1* ^ It 1* 

X X X X X X 


stated iii the original returns from the custom-houses. 



















































































































AMERICAN SHIPPING 


INTERE 




<1 

r 

U-H 

h 

o 

1—4 

P3 

PP 

o 




o 

p 




'/} 


rv' 


H 


■< 

p* 

m 


rV» 



fc 

£ 



a 

X 

H 

M 

o 




HH 


<x> 


o 

K 

h2 

> 


• 

X) 

CO 

o 


© 

Wr — 

~JL H 

P 

■+-' rj— 

p ; 

© .P 

© r 

p p 

© a 


X 


ft. 0< 


p 
© 
r*« © 

Cl ® 

P © 

k 


H ^ PHC X X r- lO C 

co id x <c c »c co c© io ©i t- cb »o 

CPCOCCOICIN l NfCMCIT'l r ^H»H 


I® 

2 ^ 
P- o 

a ^ 

.5 x 
^ V 

l/g 

H 03 


go 

H 

£ 

o 

p 

w 

o 

& 

◄ 

X 

H 


-u 

H 

c 

H 


p 

be 

• P"* 

© 

p 

=2 


x 

—"< 

© 

X 

X 

© 

k 


^o»WHO^cii>o>oswao 

X X O CJ CJ t 't H H C5 O ^ - o 

t- X CM CM Ol {DOCOO«P«OCC t- 

?® x' o' ©f X aoV^tCC3XO-t'- 

^ ^ C5 G Cl C3 X fC O "I* H O |>* Cl t'* 
C^X^.'CXCrf'QOiOh^OO 

o o' r-T©f oi o' cm' o' of o' cm' co' i o' g- 

ohC-.wO--r-^^Qr-oHr-o 

cc o r* ci ro co ci ^ m ci ci o o io 


NXOIMHOG^OOJ^O^H 

H X’ t- O 10 o rH OC CO CM CO o »-< o 

o rf IT. co O H lO c. 1C H M *C OX 

• 

J 6 of i> cm' o' co' o' x Tjf o' —- o' o' o' ccf 
^OCMCMt^OIOX »o cm o o o IO QO 

^5 ^ O X CO l> ©1 t> CO O O CM ^ lO Tt 

*© o' x' IO o' o' of -c co' o' O -h o' X if 

x co to x o w x - ic i- r- or-x 
HlOOI'-XOOXXXXOCOCOOI 


p 

P 

© • 
•rH CC 

<5 "© 

CC 
X 
© 
k 




WH(NH(N^W-‘H«OMOCOlft 
i> o t> O O O O X o O *•+ - —< 
^^HHlf5 0t»rifi'l«0»®X 


o 


^ • r- o o o»o»ooo 


W ».o o o co o »o «o r^- o »o i—i o x »o 

P^OOOCOCOrfOlOOOOOOX 

o 

o o ci co in> o o rf- r- o cc ci o x cm 
©1 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CM CM CM CM 


5 P x 
* p © 

® r -'3 
H ^ ,rH 
P © j- 
©,o © 

nt? k 


■*> 

« 

»»«a 

© 

3 


lOOXOtCT^O^iOi—*Xrt< 

, f l- I" -o CO |C •—'OX O O X 

• i© |> o i© CM — X CO O r -1 O O 

■ icf o' o' of x' co' *rf |> co' x' r- of 

• XLCOriXhOhOlCXCO 
i COXOCO , T’trt" , tC]COG 

• oi t- I'-MOXt'-OCJ’tXCJ 

• CM OI OI Cl Cl H h Cl H 01 O'! co 


• 

co 

H 

PC 

o 

p. 

ki 

K 


p 


t£ 

• 

♦ f* 

©. 

GC 

P 

© 

© 

GO 

©H 

X 


© 


M 



H X Cl Cl O ^ O N cc -o X N Cl cc 
Xl'CChXhi'XO^ CC CO X o 

t-ooioxao^^icw^^c 


oo — o »o »(0 X ‘O T* CO O OI X o 

I- X O Ol *-• x co — »o X O O Ol 

O C- X O O X X CM co »o t- o o o 


»oo. Ol OC ~f CO — oi o o o o o o 
XOMOOOO oocoooctox 

Cl ^ -*C CO -t LC LC LC LC c G O 


p 

p 

© 

• r- 

p 

© 

c* 

p 

Ol 


© 

GC 

GX 

© 

k 


p 


x rf cm o x o o rt* ^ o o o x 

^CGDOiCHOCO^ClCO^tJOt^ 

^ t - co -r t- cm o rr oi o co oi o o 


2 ci x ttc *+ ir. o o ^ ic x o co 
irr co i— co oi xxcnfi ciho co 

^ H h w O LC t M a X Ifl ^ O OJ X 




COOOUOCOI>OlOCMOCMiO 
tCXCO C G X t'* CO C O I'* IP 
H O Cl rc rf > CO X O r-» 


xicaotiM'— oo^t 
O — OOOOICO—1 co o X CO 
G O h 1 C CO X MC rt X O 


G O O X h to O l> f* 50 X *t 


CC 

H 

o 

p 


** 

bf . 

•p SO 
© 1—. 
p © 

.© cc 

*4H CC 
© 

P ^ 

M 

Dollar. i . 
300, 512, 231 

309, 140, 510 
363, 020, 644 
445, 416, 783 
471, 806, 765 
405, 320, 135 
382, 949, 568 
321, 139, 500 
329, 565, 833 
307, 407, 565 

310, 49.), 599 
579, 394, 159 
587, 647, 535 
598, 459,198 

P 

Tt o ci x © ^ o co © 

P 

. Cl G h © CC 1- Cl O 50 X >C © © CC 

.2 m 

eoOOGMXGG 1- O CM CO CC CO X 

t 


p ©i g- »o co of r-' of Ci if of o' r- o' co 

P GO • 

^OCOXXCOOIt-XCOOOXXX 

P X 1 

-oX©i5M©ir^oxcox^ioooo 

^ > 

co co' co r- if co co — co co co ©1 


^ JO O O G t- G O -t tO ’t 50 i"t 

P 

rH rH r-^ r—i r—« *—i rH rH •—- rH i-H r —1 f-H 

hH 

• 


” H 

P P X 
^ p © 
p —• Pi 

b P-- 
p^^ 


© 

'-O 

© 

c; 


h3 









. o 


CO 

X 

T— 1 


■ rf H x lO CJ G O O. CC H O o 

• x cc m 50 rt c ci o. ci ci 

• CO CO O CO X co CO O X 01 o o 

1 G 'C o r CO X MC cc i^ of »o 

'XW^HX^OOXOOtO 
’HOOiOOr-COCiOiOLO© 

• ^ ^ ^ r ^ 

• i© h- co' of o' of -f t-* of iff 

-HHr--«HHHHHnCI 

• * 


O-^CMCO'+iPONXOO 
r- r- r- r- t- r- x 

xxxxxxxxxxx 

1 —'r- rlrlriHriririHH 


©1 

X X 
X X 


Notes.— Amounts omitted : 1847. $326,800 government stores to the Army from New York; 1852, $4,648,587 imported at, San Francisco, nationality of vessels not stated ; 
1854, $3,068,287 imported at and $2,444,744 exported from San Francisco, nationality of vessels not stated. . , . 

The amounts carried in cars and other land vehicles are not separately stated previous to July 1, 1870. Exports are stated in mixed gold and currency values from 1862 

to 1879, inclusive. 



























































































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


277 


D. 

No. 91. Tonnage oj vessels of the United States employed in the foreign trade, fc., each year 

from 1836 to 1881, inclusive. 


Year ended— 


September 30— 

1836 . 

1837 . 

1838 . 

1839 . 

1840 . 

1841 . 

1842 . 


June 30— 
1843*. 

1844 . 

1845 . 

1846 . 

1847 . . 

1848 . 

1849 . 

1850 . 

1851 . 

1852 . 

1853 . 

1854 . 

1855 . 

1856 . 

1857 . 

1858 . 

1859 . 

1860 . 

1861. 

1862. 

1863 . 

1864 . 

1865t. 

1865*. 

1866r. 

1866*....,. 

1867t. 

1867+. 

1868t. 

1868+. 

1869t. 

1870§.. 

1871 . 

1872 . 

1873 . . 

1874 . 

1875 .. 

1876 . 

1877 .. 

1878 . 

1879 .. 

1880 .. 

1881. 


Foreign 

trade. 

Coastwise 

trade. 

Whale fish¬ 
eries. 

Cod fish¬ 
eries. 

Mackerel 

fisheries. 

Total 

merchant 

marine. 

Tons. 

Tons. 

Tons. 

Tons. 

Tons. 

Tons. 

753, 094 

873, 023 

146, 254 

63, 307 

46, 424 

1, 882,102 

683, 205 

956, 981 

129,137 

80, 552 

46,811 

1, 896, 686 

702, 962 

1, 041,105 

124, 860 

70, 064 

56, 649 

1, 995, 640 

702, 400 

1, 153, 552 

132, 285 

72, 258 

35, 984 

2, 096, 479 

762, 838 

1,176, 694 

136, 927 

76, 036 

28, 269 

2, 180, 764 

788, 398 

1, 107, 068 

157,405 

66, 552 

11,321 

2, 130, 744 

823, 746 

1, 045, 753 

151, 990, 

54, 805 

16, 097 

2, 092, 391 

856, 930 

1, 076, 156 

152,517 

61,224 

11, 776 

2,158, 603 

900, 471 

1, 109, 615 

168, 614 

85, 225 

16, 171 

2, 280, 096 

904, 476 

1,223,218 

190, 903 

76, 991 

21,414 

2,417, 002 

943,307 

1, 315. 577 

187, 420 

79, 318 

36, 463 

2, 562, 085 

1, 047, 4.54 

1,488, 601 

193, 859 

77, 681 

31, 451 

2, 839, 046 

1,168, 707 

1, 659, 317 

192, 613 

89, 847 

43, 558 

3, 154, 042 

1, 258, 756 

1,770,376 

180, 186 

81,756 

42, 942 

3, 334, 016 

1, 439, 694 

1.797, 825 

146, 017 

93, 806 

58, 112 

3, 535, 454 

1, 544, 663 

1, 899, 976 

181, 644 

95, 61.7 

50, 539 

3, 772, 439 

1, 705. 650 

2, 055, 873 

193, 798 

' 110,573 

72, 546 

4, 138, 440 

1, 910,471 

2, 134, 258 

193, 2u3 

109, 228 

59, 850 

4, 407,010 

2,151,918 

2, 322,114 

181, 901 

111, 928 

35, 041 

4, 802, 902 

2, 348, 358 

2, 543, 255 

186, 848 

111,915 

21,625 

5, 212, 001 

2, 302,190 

2, 247, 663 

189,461 

102, 452 

29, 887 

4, 871, 653 

2, 268, 196 

2, 336, 609 

195, 842 

111,868 

28, 328 

4, 940, 843 

2, 301, 148 

2, 401, 220 

198, 594 

119, 252 

29, 594 

5, 049, 808 

2,321,674 

2. 480, 929 

185, 728 

129, 637 

27, 070 

5, 145, 038 

2, 379, 396 

2, 644, 867 

166, 841 

136, 653 

26, 111 

5, 353, 868 

2, 496, 894 

2, 704, 544 

145, 734 

137, 846 

54, 795 

5, 539, 813 

2, 173, 537 

2, 606, 716 

117,714 

133, 601 

80, 596 

5,112, 164 

1, 926, 886 

2, 960, 633 

99, 228 

117, 290 

51, 019 

5, 155, 056 

1, 486, 749 

3, 245, 265 

95, 145 

103, 742 

55, 499 

4, 986, 400 

509, 199 

1, 016, 199 

1,380* 

36, 683 

16. 533 

1,579, 994 

1, 009,151 

2, 365, 323 

89, 136 

28, 502 

24, 676 

3, 516, 788 

1,031,541 

2, 162, 220 

76, 990 

51,139 

46, 589 

3, 368, 479 

356, 215 

557, 401 

28, 180 

503 


942, 209 

1, 300, 852 
214,796 

1, 460, 940 
33, 449 

2, 528, 214 
132, 176 

2, 702,140 

52, 384 

44, 567 

31,498 

3, 957, 515 
346, 972 

4, 318, 310 

33, 449 
4, 144, 641 

71,343 

. 

83, 887 


1, 496, 220 

2, 515,515 

70, 202 

62, 704 


1,'448, 846 

2, 638, 247 

67, 954 

91, 460 


4, 246, 507 

1, 363, 652 

2, 764, 600 

61,490 

92, 865 


4, 282, 607 

1, 359, 040 

2, 929, 552 

51, 608 

97, 547 


4, 437, 747 

1, 37H, 533 

3, 163, 220 

44, 755 

109, 519 


4, 696, 027 

1,389, 815 

3,293,439 j 

39, 108 

78, 290 


4. 800, 652 

1, 515, 598 

3,219.698 

38, 229 

80, 207 


4, 853, 732 

1, 553, 705 

2, 598, 835 

39, 116 

87, 802 


4, 279, 458 

1, 570, 600 

2, 540, 322 

40, 593 

91,085 

. 

4, 242, 600 

1,589, 348 

2, 497, 170 

39, 7o0 

86, 547 

. 1 

4, 212, 765 

1, 451, 505 

2, 598,183 

40, 028 

79, 885 


4, 169, 601 

1, 314. 402 

2, 637, 686 

38, 408 

77, 538 


4, 068, 034 

1, 297, 035 

2, 646, 011 

38, 551 

76,137 


4, 057, 734 


Nine months. 


tNew measurement. 


Old measurement: 


§!New from 869. 










































































































278 




s 


o 


<3 

© 

HO 






• «o 
ho 

co 


O 

h) 


55 


o> 

§_ 

4§ x> 

cc X 


2: O 

x 

CO 1—4 


''w © 

^ O 


00 

© -v 


••>0 Cc, 


'H -2 
5 ^ 


■w 


<*> 






co 

>r» 

55> 


<^> 

10 


• *o 


o 

OD 


Sj 


v 

HO 

CO 


o 

X 


S5 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


f ' 

a 


© 


p 

p 

<1 


6 w g 

-o 0; ^ 
H ~ OC « 

S ^ P Sh 

p 0 £ ^ 

- £ P. 


0> 

fr 


SS§SS§S5!5:BgSSS§SSSSSS5SSS§S83S3S;gSS^ 

VTfN^dOH«N^«nic'®H®K;T|ldcCK52«®®* ON 2 f3HrlH 0” IN 

CO rH CM 1 -* H 


0 

p 


f- 

03 


4^ 

P 

03 

rP 

c 

£-* 

CJ 


d 


o 

H 


Co 

£ 

.0 


01 

© 

ID 


WWt' 000 >XOCQONr>Q 0 a< 0 WH 

x © © 01 © 01 — h x *c cd »o © © © h 


ODCCInClOHGHDDiOHH 


o 

Ol 


l'Ch*+X'0 O H X X 71 c c CM -+ l— cc ^ Cl 

Ss;2:§gS§§3S335sSE;gS*3SSt 
«" g S S & 5; s S g 2 G 5; g 5 § § g g S' gf g § S g 

If Cc Cc Or-SoOxSoiSoOQOHCMNWW’tNNr-iriCOWCOW CM CM CM CO CO CC Tt 


s 

ce 

a; 



a 


NO 

HH* 

j8 

HH 

O 

H 

r—* 

•PH 

d 

ifl 


© 

• 


Ol 

d 

■H* 

-Hi 


4-J 

A 

w 


X 


Cc 

fO 

£ 


Ol X X Ol © © Ol ^ l> t-« 00 »D 

r- Ol © © t- © t^ O © cc -f © 

D. c: ’t ^ 10 ri fH -t w t> iD »D 


CMt^COf'-H*XiC© 
r D I- rr »D © rH © © 

. ic ?: H CO D C5 

§ i-T ocTof Ttf o' x" r-~ 1 -T CD*" co” of of r- of cf of o' cc cc of o' *rf of © 50 © x of of rtf©* © Jg ^ 

q O I— © © Ol 01 -fX t^©Xt-'**©'H»'*f'^©©’rfiDOiX©©iD©to©OI©X©01_ - 

^ CM ^ iC 10 id © h*x XX©©©X©©rHOI01CMXrt<OICMrHr-iXXXCMOI01CMXXX’^ 


© © r-J 

r—• © 

X © © 


I ^ ^ 


*—* CO 
• CM CM CM 


01 co 01 r- x © x © 01 »o 01 r- x © t- co © 

XX © © C1 O CM r- r- x LO © »C © X ID »D 

01 l>»ft©©CMHN©^L^rH©©©iOO 


t> 

© 


© 

© 


Cc 

£ 

£ 


as 


& X 

cc p 


n 


z* 


'p 

a? 

cc 


d> 

c 


s 

d 


<v 

-to 

in 


OD 




« 

X 


Co 

p 

fi 


Xt-XOXX01L^X^©COCOCO^LD©©©X©^ : ©CO©©^tCM©©©X-0 

© ?l H t- O C 'X H O - X C) X © 1 C r .O H r- 01 CM COCMCOXXCO^OCO^^hCM 
OI © © X 1-0 CO CO CC © © OI © Tf iD © X © H* CO 'rr © Tr CO L - ^ 1C r —t CO © © >D ^ 


© oi »o X o — 
OI CM OI CO CO 


•— 1 ■ r H' © t - X © 

X CO CO CO CO co 


© 05 © H OI O • 01 CO © © H OI ' p 0 © X © 

*t CO 't ’t ’t ^ L » ^ ^ © 


© 


»—H OI r—i Hf* 
© © © © 


C0t-X©XXOll^X'rt©C0C0C0^*O©©©X©t'^©CO©©'^Ol©©©X , rt‘ 

© ci 1^ o x »^ © h x ci x © i.c co co h r- 01 oi cc oi co x cc co Tf uc cc h rr 01 

CM 1© © X ic> CO L- CO CO © © OI CO »C © X © T* X Hti © ^ X 10 1-H CO © © 10 ^ 


©01»COX©^Hr^^i©r^X©©©©—OIOl01CO©©-^OI^©X©©^Cl--;^t 
Cl OI CJ M M CO CO .*0 CO ,*0 M ^ cc ^ o "t 10 uc ».c »o o CO © © © o CO 


d 

o 

H 




X 

<0 


cc 


©co©©t^x©r-r-^ti©-tT— 
© CM CO OI OI ^ © X X CM 10 I- 
© rH © © x OI X Oi iO IfO OI CM 


H CC © I' © ’t Tf Tf c © © N © x X N Cl © »0 Cl © 
CO»Ort'lOX©X©!>^^<CO©OI© ©Xt^^'— X^© 
OI OI © 1- © rH t- © © r-( x © L- X OI © © © © X 


o 01 © X X 01 © X X »o X X rf< X © © —- © CM X © ID 10 10 01 © »D OI © ©> 

o G ?: X 'O ^ c D CM r}i © Tt D N a ^ M O X G .*C © O OI 50 T}( x D H x C X © 




ci -+ 

H x CC IOU 5 

OI OI OI Cl OI OI O! X X X X X -* X X -t ^ Ht ID lO ID ID © © © © © © 


05 

<£> 


o 

u 

p 

w 


ct 

a» 

C fl 


Cc 

p 


• t c 


, . •<©©*— 

• • ■ t- iH © 

. • • X © © 


O* ... • » • ... 

..*. ‘ ;. ;•;••«■•• cm CM cm 


io 


©X©©t^X©t-I^Hf©'rt<-H — LO—X©t^©'r^^-f 

© cj - - ci ci -t © x x 01 id t- *— x > o s 10 x c x ©r- 

© — © © X OI X OI ID »D -r* OI CM rH CM Cl I- © l- © H © 


iC 


©©l>©Xt^Xt^O!©©CMOO 
rf x © Cl © ©Xt^r-HrHUOCOX 
^HXDt^XCM©t^©H©X 


d 

in 


s N PI © X X h Cl C X X iC X X -+ X © © »— 1 © OI X r- © id »o id 01 © »D 01 © © CM -t © © -*t 

C X X id -* © © OI -* © rt< © I- © X «D © I - X © © CI © Ht X © — X © X © H X © X X 

^ nHrHHHCICMOl M Ol OI OI X X XXX i l XX , t'T^ l, + , tLO*0 »D ID © © © © © © 


a> 


X 
© 
. X 
Cc . 

p cc 

O Dl 

E>. ^ 


^©X^X-C 0 b«®^H^Hh.©HlDt*^©®Ol^MXiD©lD©©a<O©HXX 
ID »— X X © l>» X I — I '■ © 01 © X ID X H* X © ID id © iD CM iD X © © Ol X X © iD Ol X 

OI ^ t> X rf t- t- X h © © X r- ID X CM X © © OI X © X © OI t- © © © X H © © I- 

©- -f CC ©- Tt HT rf © of ©- of ©- ©- CC ©- ©- ©- 

H X © ?D G MD © © O - nHOIX©©- 

© © t- t- © © X X X © ©©’©©©© l- 


© x »— x © © i - x 01 © o 1 © 01 © x x © 

-t © h © x oi t- © © © © x © © r- rf © Tt* © 

X X it cc rt* ID ID id © © © © iD iD © I- X X t- 


Cc. , 4 1. . « .. 

I— ‘ ... ........ ' . 

O • • • • • ..... • . .. • I • • t I 

£h I;;;;;;;;;;;;;:;;;;;;;;;:;;;;;;;;;;; 

* ' ' * • ' * • • • • ' • • « • I • • • • * • • I I • • » * » I t I I I 

_ 1 ' 1 * • 1 _ • * 1 ... . . •.... > ' I t • I I . I • 

W'+©C0^X-CCl'©hrl^HI^©HiDt^^©©01i'XXiD©»0a5OXD©-'X0C 
© iO H ,*0 X © G X I'* h* D Ol © X O "C rf- X © ID L* © ID Cl O X © C? CM X X ’t CMD OH - X 

. CO Cl r Tf t- X i" t- I- .C H © © M h ID X OJ ^ O © CM X © X © (M O G © © © X 1 H 0 C N 

X © x rt t- X © © 1 ^ X Ol © Ol © |hT 01 © X X © ©" X- ©- H* Tff o ©- ©- of of of X- ©- ©- ©- 

© CM -*+ © »— 1 © X C» t~- © © © © x © © t-'- Ht* © © r-i X © © |-— l>- ID © © © f— r— — CM X © © 

^ n w X Tf xID 1C 1.0 (O © © © I.* ID © P X X t- © © h h © © X X X O © O 50 © !C C ^ 


o 


© © H Ol X -f 
X © © © © © 
t- t> i - t- i - 


ID © t-» X © © 
© © © © © © 
l> I— I— I— X 


Ol X ID © 1^ X © © f-H Ol X ID © P- X © © «—I OI X ID 

© © © © © © © © © »-h rH *-H «-H H *— 1 rH •—4 r rH Ol CM Ol Oi Ol Ol 

-CXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX xxxxxxxx 


X 


o 

0 


V 




















































































































































































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


279 


o x m 

CCOrf 

t> irf 


o 

co 

l'- 


Tp 

in 

Ol 


X fC C5 rmf: t> 

x m m in r- — t> 


OliOOlOOCCXOOr-t 
Ol O O CO CC rH CC O O X 


H o O C5 ^ M W O O (O h W h H W Tf c 'r m ^ C>1 cc o CC 

f- O t' N ^ o o ic ^ CJ 05 O Ti* ^ a 'M M H rH t"t X © X C 1 ! H X 


OW-JCiWWO^lO^^HWiOO^dHirjdOOjtOCOOOOHWHTjicOt^d'cONiCOriTfwdeCOWHH 




p- 

05 

CO 


£J ^r52f5Sfcd£J^2priit^i2'S2?SS^ ,:0, ^ C5OOC ‘ lrHe0C0C0GC00C0,, ^ ?0OCk100r ^ C5 ^' t- n t> i- w ci» 

? S K 5 Ip 12 2 2 2 S S ^ 2 ."=; S S ^ ^ IT ^ ^ ^ ° ^ ° ^ ^ — o -h cc i* o x i - x m -t o o tp oi in x in 

~ 1 pXTrHC5v.HO^^GG?:ooooocoTf<t*toao!CxxoxxHO’ti-t'-^h , oi.ropoopTf 


^p o 
CO 01 
m CO 


^ 2 r ^ ^ 2 r JS ^ ^ ‘5 o o ci x o n cj o ^ c 1 ! x n ci ci - o cj o c: o; ci ic o *o c -t h rt- o m r- o c w o 

^ r. 2 2 ^ ^ r 9, 2 S x r * ^ S ^ 9 *5 u - -2 ^ [ - w ^ ^ ft ^ ^ °c ^ o ^ -t x co o o ^ 

('•H^CJ-fOL'XXXC50r-iHCHCI’tOXH?;iOl^H’tXCJXOO»-^iOHHCOCO.*OCCH'MC]’^OXXCI 


H r-< !M : i n 01 01 Ol 04 Ol Ol CO CO CO CO rp ^P m rp tP in m m m m m -p in Tp -P Hp -P ^ Tp Tp -p Tp Tp ^ 


S 9S i £3 U 32 I? ^ ,-5 i~ Vt 2 R 2 ? “i Ir ® ^ £2 ^ r 1l *~ • ~ i> o x in i- ^p o co h- tp co 05 o o oi o m x in c^ co co o oo oi 
^r:Z£^!^l£™£^^*2£I3^££^ L ~5£ cc :r2?:3: c:,a *'“ H:=, "'+^ :=>0 o r ^ 0 oc5inxoco-Hcox-Hx--<' , .oc5xin^pr-cot- 
^ r- rf w rt x x x x io t—j- oo: o i- x ri o x x x co o o ci o o cl o i' co t- o cj' t o a h o x ^ »o o o io ^ co o m 


co22J^IS??S^A?S?i2S$2i5£JP^2^ 0 "?^r 3t t'" ir > fif co" tp' co o' co in cf x" r-" r- o" in t-' i> co" —<" of co" m" t>" 

X Tp X in CO w C5 <- 01 Ol t} 1 C O. O O t" 01 CC I’* ~i , f O Ol O Cl X *+ O t - I'* t' O Cl O O l - * H h- N O X 05 O O X 

r^ r- — r- f-4 t~» *- 0 | r- 01 M Ol c: rf 1 O o O O t'* O G t'* P» X X O C5 O O h H r-* o o 


co m x oi 

lO XCt' 


01 


5 ^ 2 ^ S £ ^ ^ t' ^ ^ ^ ci »o H -- t- CJ O OJ iO O O O X H o ^ t- c c: CD c 

•j. ~ tr r° 2 2 ?3 2 2 Q *■£ 32 r. 'J2 £J 1*2 ^ ~ :r 9£ ^ ° o co ° 05 o -h I - m — x co o o co ^ tp co o tp i 

« "T y,.' CC Tf o „. o H iO o Cl ^ i" O O C5 O H oi -< O C CC OI CO Cl P* ir. C i* C) o. O P- »o O Ol o co o O H iO o o o 


O Tp Tp <M **» CO 

t-cbx^cooo 


GO — CO I- X X ^ '£> Cl C ’-' M H X O C) h p« C 
OCCO OW05^0COOCC^OOGiO©C10C5 
O 1C Cl m m ro LO O 1^ I- G X Cl O C5 X Cl o o 


Ol 


rp CC — O X IO Cl O H 
CO Ol t'OXCJOCl-’t 

**P i> X o ^h r* ao -r 


XLOOIOLOClHOiXONN'NH 

05cooit>xcoor-ooQoa*-JLO^ 

HOlfOCOi'CO'^L'iOOff'l^r-O 


h -h co a m ir. t— 
I'* O Cl CO H x o 
H r -1 cc lO O O H 


HfHrH T -,HHmr-rir-lT-lHHH^riHr-(ClClClM0101COMC:M^rt'Tj''i'^TfTt'^TtTfi'rf«C , :Ci:CCCCCO'?tf:CCCQa5 


r-HOIXTPHXPP 
COlOOQtCPMMOCO 
o CO M X M a O 1C 


cxociox^ccoco 
O Oi rp co CO Ol IO G O X 
X 01 O CO —* O CC 04 i- tP 


X rH XOiXOH^'tX^ 

OXClCJXCiwH-tco 
O "t »C1 X - t>• G P* O H 


*<pinOC5XCOX05»OCOin 
OCXOOXO^WOH 
CO L.0 05 co CO t'- 05 O H X 


NOCONHO-^ COIOCO 
OC0MC005C5(NXHC0 
o x h t> r-i t- x m m x 


co co co <m co i^ x o oi oi — mcf o o" r- of -t~o 

CO CO CO Ol Ol Ol 01 00 CO CC CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 


co" in co" o" co" in o" r-" r-T of co" t-* o" -h*" p-" x" oi" oi" o" of —" of of" of m* co" of r-T »-h 
T t* rp m o incomco^^rfinininTpinm^co^ m in in m in in m co co 


• Tp in 05 o in co co co in 

•WMClXOlOOPTf 

WOJOnOJCOPrHX 


• • • of of co" co" cc" rp" -rp" in in 



h h ci x *t p ^ x p ^ o x o oi o: x m o co co x ^ o x o io tp x io o a co co x a ic co m p co ^ x h »r. h p oi x 

co m o o io g ci x o o oi rp co n ci co i- o x o x ci cc x o x r- co *sO o x co o: x o w c h 05 oi h r: h co ci x p* x 

o^tco«Mxxi^05oinxoiocor-.ocooit^TpinTpinxHp-t^p-05»-icoino5cocot>o>t-OHcooinoip»oxoit>€oo5 

cc" co" co" of co" l> x" o" Ol" of ^ in of cT o" P-" of Tp" t- of of co" »n" co" o" CO in o" P-" — 1 of co" P-' o" rp" P-" x" of of o" of cf of x" of rH of Tp" co" m" 

o co co oi oi oi oi co co co co ^ co rp -p co co co co co x rp -p m m m co m co -rp ^ ^p m m m m m -rp co rp m rp rp 'rp m in uo in m 


oicD^t^NNOscooi'Nt^Hd: oioccnxx ’pool oi m m co t- oi »n —' co o co t- x 05 m co h co x co o ^ 05 m co o tp 

XXP*inrfXX05XHMHOOOrHC0ClC0TpC5»0C0fCincCC)C'lC0C0Xt'*XC0C005O01N05C0OC005p , t>OH^no 

h a h cc ^ o o ^ w o n o o; oi x Oi © o io co ci n co ci m w oi c h g x w o c« o co o h o m co h c C5 m cc o h w x 

o" co" of x" t-T o co" m" of co" of —" co" ^-" o" r-" rp in co" of of tp" r-" x" of of co" o f r-T »n" r - co" of co" of of of co" of -p" x" m" co co" t-" »n" —"m" of x" tp" 

c: O CO X Ci Ol Ol Cl co O 'Cl.*: c: oi P ^P X H g X C. O P P O O X P - W X O X IO W P MC O I' 05 X Ol G O P r- m m 

h X X C. ic C G X X 03 o; O r- Ol Ol ^ O n H Cl n 10 G X X 05 H (N p CO CO 10 lO G X G O CO p h O t ' 1C CO X 05 Ol CO Cl CO 


H r-. — r-t r— r-l H H r- »— r—< r* H H 01 Ol Ol 01 Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol CO Ct CO Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol X X X Ol 


CJXXPMXWCOppJlr- ClCipOlOPOhCOCMiflmPOXHOClHMiftH'vOiftpp--'CCmOlHOlCOOlL^OJCOO 
1.0 Ol H M 1C (O CO O P h O CO W X P m 05 P Cl O H ci Cl O HinC5t^Tt<OHCOO-l<C5COOir. COWCO’PCKNPCOhCOOC 
orHTpooincox'rp'prHcocoxHXOrpoimcooixinooiinoinc<ixo5xocoin^pxo5HoiP-HTpinmo5Tpinxx 


•pocp^xcHMcii^^coxpiOr-icoHoiHriHH^pHioMx^oopONiociicjcoGOiwoixoHX 
co p n in «o cc o o ci ci o o o x c. g oi n co ^ p oi h p x ci co x *n x h m m- g C5 p m o x os t- x r- o w m x n «o 

h r-> h h h r« r- h ci oi cue x n p p p in i.n m m co o co co C 1 g p* >n p x 05 x C5 o x x 05 05 05 ci oi o 


XXXO^P05COOXXinOt^XCO*-H05^PXt-f(N0500 0HppHp05^ClNM005t>01p.MiOMX^GXGrpTli 

<NXin0l05Tpin<05OCC01inC0 0H > ^P-r-HCCC0^a0''P©^-Hin^05 01C00501l0<MC005®TpX*-C0rH05<M05HC0TpC5t'-XO 
h m- p: w p o x c. h ^p m co o co io co m oi x co o x t - m h c m io p ic p p 05 oi x io x m 05 m o o co p p co ^ ‘O uo.in 

co" co" o f ’■p x" r-" cc cc co" Tp" r-" r -" co o f of x" of x" x" of t—"in m" co" x" —T of x" of o" ^p tp o" o" of -rp" in" x co" rp x" —" x x" x" »-f t- co" co" <o" 

05 co oi x oi »n x :i p x o c. ^ x p mc x o o m o x o h - m oi o m h io h x co x 05 x 05 o x c. o p io w o m 

C X »C o IO 'X G G t> X X 05 O O C5 X X 05 05 O H X *t’t P © G X O h X X 05 O O H *0 P p X G CO N O O Ol X Cl CO 

r—( T- - HHHHHrlriHHHrlHHpHf-OIOlOl Ol Ol r-4 H H r—l H H Ol Ol Ol 01 r—I 


x o 05 x m oi o x oi »n r- oi m m x 05 vn »n oi x i- oi h r- x rp 05 co x x oi 01 x —* ^ rp x co 01 01 01 o 01 x x x h 

j^ r -, rJ ^^i^05 01XC'lGPOP^COOOGX-XPHO^GHXCCPOMClLnH05XClWX01OPPX(NClCl 
C5 H O rH p P 05 O P X I- P O (M h X ^ X G r-! Cl X X Olt'* X P CO X m P C G rj< Cl w Cl h X O Cl O N P X H CO Cl 05 X X 


r> t> oi o co o co o »n NocipmcmoiX m o 
x rp h m t- oi x m m x 05 h oi x 05 rp o co 05 x 
i^r^xcomcocot^xxxxxxxc5050oorH 


HOxincooccxinHcooNcociHcor-NMxmcofinowxxN' 

pcoxxciooxnooooppojoixooococoHoiHoiOHno 

oix^pinoxHxmTp^pTpinincooioinco-pininininrpTpTP^pinin 


Mi-ir-'HHriHHr-ir-lMClClOllNOlOllNCICl'MHnHHHHMHHHHHr' 


C5 H 1C' O C P P H C5 IO CO 
“-r-xpppinoopLnp 
^pXrHinXX^Pr-r-^rHt- 


HXOOlh^XOOlOP 
OhHClXXOhPCiO 
X 05 ^P Ol CO O X 05 X r> 


o co m m x r- x co x x m co 
01X^P»—I h ^1 ^ 05 O 05 H o 
O o O O X O t - M O 05 N O 


x 05 in 05 oi w* ^ co x m 05 

OXHMiO’t-'COOli'XN 

o 01 *-1 05 oi m 05 co tp oi co 01 


h 01 m ^p 


-p" 


in co" co" co" in co" o" rp of of 

H Ol TP CO t - 


o"»n"*n" of co"x"of of x"x of x"x" x""x of o"r—" x"in -f x" 

0)0>H00C0h-05 05OHX01050505(N^0lXI>C5 05 05 0) 

1 —» rH iH »-H r-f t-H *-^ Ol OlHHHHHHH 


CC 05 CO in 05 Ol OC Ol r*H X r-* CO t" X 1 Ol lO ^2 u < w* 1 wv i'- •^j’ '-j’ w>w »—1 '-'w *-^ w —> -. v w« v^w « • •• • vi 

SS2^Sh-OOOnX?lPoS^lOOn>OXOOOHt-0'H-piftc005CC05^inpMlOOX^fOrHC5G;iO^CCO^XO 
S5-icoSoinxT^OTpxxxocoocoo5Xcoocoxoi>05i>Hi>ocoot-coo50<MXXincoo5i>Hoi(M05Xcor-.in 

. ^ —r. -T —T r-rT jvJ' »/-T»' I«^r /^r»»/-r -—r*-T crT ■*-*'»rT crT ccT <T-Pcr,n>fv-0l05Tp'TpO5XXTp'^POl05X0lTP 


Ol 05 01 CH , » P CC H X 1.0 m P h O X 05 x in 1 ^ <rs 

iOXO50PO5Hin^«inC5XI>XHC5 


< 1 li. V/^ ^T 1 

P* iO Cl 00 X> P* X 05 

m 


t^^oiono5C005r-int^05C505 niconHXpinpx 
nPHint^HXPl0X05O' J 'N05P^OC000ClXPH 
L>hOOCOiOCOCOhXOO»OOOOOOX050>OOOHNX^ 


OX05XXO»-Ht^»-H^XOr^0105TpTp05XXTP < rP0105X0lTp 
p O ^ H CC Ol O N C 1 ! H p p [■» 05 lO O 05 O P lO (N P ro 01 X CO 05 

incoxooirpTpx-p'pTpinHX-pmoixxxxoioioioixx 


HHHr-C-<Hr-M-lHHCl(N01C10101 Ol CJOlOlHHr-iHHHHriHH-'nHH 









. —^ 





• 

, 

. ,_V 


• 

• 


A 


A 


• 

A 

A 


• 

A 

A 

• 

A 

% 


. 



A 

A 


• 


A 

A 

t 

A 

• 







1 

. cc 

• 


• 

• 

• 

1 

1 CC • 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 

« 

• 

1 

• 

t 

% 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 

• 

• 

• 

• 


1 

• 

• 

• 

1 

a 

• 

• 

• 

A 

a 

• 

• 

1 

• 

1 

1 

• 

• rP 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 

1 

• jn . 

• 

1 

• 

1 

1 

( 

• 

• 

f 

f 

% 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 

1 

• 


A 

• 

• 

A 

A 

1 

• 

t 

• 

• 

a 



• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• -*— 1 

• 

• 

% 

• 

9 

■ 

. +3 • 

• 

• 

• 


A 

• 

A 

• 


A 

9 


• 

A 




1 











* 




• 

• 

• 

V 

• 

■ 

• 

* P 

• 

• 

• 

A 

• 

' • 

p : 

• 

• 

A 

A 

• 

A 

A 

A 

A 

• 

A 


• 

• 








• 











• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

t 

• 

• 

1 

I 

' G 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

f 

• 

1 

f 

§ : 

• 

1 

• 

• 

• 

*• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 

1 

• 

• 

• 

1 

• 

1 

• 

• 

1 

• 

t 

1 

• 

1 

1 

• 

• 

a 

• 

a 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

t 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• P 
! ® 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

3 

: : 

1 

• 

A 

t 

• 

■ 

% 

• 

A 

• 

• 

A 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 

• 

f 

• 

A 

• 

• 

1 

1 

• 

• 

• 

* 

A 

• 

• 

A 

• 

1 

• 

1 

• 

• 

t 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

• 

• 

a 

A 

1 

• 

• 

a 

• 

A 

• 

• 

1 

a 

a 

1 

• 

1 

• 

a 

a 

• 

a 

a 

a 

a 

a 







• 

. p 


1 



1 

1 

. p . 

* 

• 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

• 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

• 

• 

1 

1 

• 

1 

• 

1 

a 

• 

• 

1 

a 

• 

1 

1 

a 

a 








A ,rH 
















• 

• 

• 

• 

1 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 

t 

• 

• 

1 

• 

• 

• 

a 







• 

• 

. P 


1 

• 

1 

• 

• 

. p ! 

t 

• 

• 

1 

1 

1 

t 

• 

1 

» 

• 

• 

• 

* 

1 

• 

t 

< 

• 

• 

» 

1 

a 

• 

• 

• 

a 

1 

a 

a 

l 

a 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 

• 

• 

* '—' 


• 

• 



• 

• ' « 

• 

# 

• 

A 

• 

• 

A 

A 

A 

A 

• 

A 

A 


% 

• 

• 


1 

t 

A 

• 




A 








CO h* X 05 O ^ 01 X l" <—v »■ 

OIOIOIOIXCOXXCOXXXXX'P*'' 

xxxxxxccxocxxxxxxc 


tp m co x 05 o 1—1 oi x 'P 4 «n co _ _ 

'rp-^-^Prp'rh'rr'rp-p 

X X X X X X X X X 


X 

^P 

m 

CO 

t- 

X 

05 

O 

T— 1 

Ol 

X 

-P 

m 

CC 

t- 

m 

in 

m 

in 

in 

m 

in 

CO 

CO 

co 


CO 

co 

CO 

CO 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

r—1 

tH 

r-H 

rH 

r—' 

rH 

r—I 

rH 

r-l 

rH 

rH 

*—< 

rr 

rH 

rH 


o 

X 


o 

r Jl 


o 

X 

<D 


t- r- 

X X X X X X X 


o 

X 

© 

p 

p 
























































































































No. 86. — Statement showing the amount of registered, enrolled, and licensed sail and steam tonnage, <fc. —Continued. 


280 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 



GQ 


P 

W 


to 

e 


co m x rj- o 


— CO CO H 

CO to O 10 o 
00 CO CO CO CM 


§ into CO co co 

^ <m" <N fff 


^ O CO CO lO 05 

O to" o' w" 0 C to" 

k h 05 H 1C O 

^ . r*>, <-s —i 


05 CO CO CD 
CO 05 CO ^ 
00 05 SM 


2 CM 00 00 O 
£ 05 Ol 05 05 UO 

o to tc to tro o 

Eh _r_r_r - - 


CO t> CO O CO 
05 CO h CO 
• H o to 00 to 


£ ^ 05 i-H 01 to 
O H CM 05 to CO 
CO CO ^ CO CO 


CO CO CO 05 
• CO CO (M O CO 
l i— oo CO co t> 


ooiocor^ 

CD C - O H 
^ O M <M <M CO 

£ oo" to" co" cvf 

O <M *C CO O 00 
bi ^ ^ CO r-i 


l> 00 05 ■ 

00 00 >X 00 c 


I 

>> 


ar 

bC 

a 


I 

o 

fc 


















































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


281 


F. 


No. 85 .—Statement showing the class, number, and tonnage of vessels built in the United 

States, from 1»05 to 1881, inclusive. 


Year ended— 

N 

Ships 

and 

barks. 

umber o 

Brigs. 

f each class of ves 

Sloops, 
Schoon- canal- 
ers. boats, and 
j barges. 

sels buil 

Steam¬ 

ers. 

t. 

Total 

number 

vessels 

built. 

Total ton¬ 
nage. 

Dec. 31,1805. 



| 



128 *07. 03 

1806. 







126' 093 29 

1807. 







9o'783 92 

1808. 







31 755 34 

1809.. 







91 397. 55 

1810. 







127 575 86 

1811 . 







*146 691. 82 

1812. 







84 691.42 

1813. 







31 153. 40 

1814. 







29 039. 90 

1815. 

136 

224 

680 

284 


1, 324 

154 624. 39 

1816. 

76 

133 

781 

424 


1, 414 

131 667.86 

1817. 

34 

86 

559 

394 


1, 073 

86 , 393. 37 

1818. 

53 

85 

428 

332 


898 

82, 421.20 

1819. 

53 

82 

473 

94A> 


850 

79, 817. 86 

1820. 

21 

60 

301 

152 


534 

47, 784. 01 

1821. 

43 

89 

248 

127 


507 

55, 856. 01 

1822.. 

64 

131 

260 

168 


623 

75; 346. 93 

1823 . 

55 

127 

260 

165 

15 

622 

75, 007. 57 

1824 . 

56 

156 

377 

166 

26 

781 

90, 939. 00 

1825. 

56 

197 

538 

168 

35 

994 

114, 997. 25 

1826 .. 

71 

187 

482 

227 

45 

1 , 012 

126, 438. 35 

1827. 

58 

136 

364 

141 

38 

• 737 

104, 342. 67 

1828.. 

73 

108 

474 

197 

33 

885 

98, 375. 58 

1829. 

44 

68 

485 

145 

43 

785 

77, 098. 65 

1830. 

25 

56 

403 

116 

37 

637 

58, 084. 24 

1831. 

72 

95 

416 

94 

34 

711 

85, 962. 68 

1832. 

132 

143 

568 

122 

100 

1,065 

144, 539.16 

1833.. 

144 

169 

625 

185 

65 

1 , 188 

161, 626. 36 

1834. 

98 

94 

497 

180 

88 

957 

118, 330. 37 

Sept. 30,1835 (nine months).. 

25 

50 

301 

100 

30 

506 

46, 238. 52 

1836. 

93 

65 

444 

164 

124 

890 

113, 627. 49 

1837. 

67 

72 

507 

168 

135 

949 

122, 987. 22 

1838.. 

66 

79 

510 

153 

90 

898 

113,135. 44 

1839. 

83 

89 

439 

122 

125 

858 

120, 988. 34 

1840. 

97 

109 

378 

224 

63 

871 

118, 309. 23 

1841. 

114 

101 

311 

157 

78 

761 

118, 893.71 

1842.. 

116 

91 

273 

404 

137 

1 , 021 

129, 083. 64 

June 30,1843 (nine months). 

58 

34 

138 

173 

79 

482 

63, 617. 77 

1844. 

73 

47 

204 

279 

163 

766 

• 103,537.29 

1845. 

124 

87 

322 

342 

163 

1, 038 

146, 018. 02 

1816. 

100 

164 

576 

355 

225 

1,420 

188, 203. 93 

1847. 

151 

168 

689 

392 

198 

1,598 

243, 732. 67 

1848. 

154 

174 

701 

547 

175 

1, 851 

318, 075. 54 

1849. 

198 

148 

623 

370 

208 

1,547 

256, 577. 47 

1850 .. 

247 

117 

547 

290 

159 

1, 360 

272, 218. 54 

1851. 

211 

65 

522 

326 

233 

1,357 

298, 203. 60 

1852. 

255 

79 

584 

267 

259 

1, 444 

351,493. 41 

1853. 

269 

95 

681 

394 

271 

1,710 

425, 572. 49 

1854. 

334 

112 

661 

386 

281 

1, 774 

535, 636. 01 

1855. 

381 

126 

605 

669 

243 

2, 024 

583, 450. 04 

1856. 

306 

103 

594 

479 

221 

1, 703 

469, 393. 73 

1857. 

251 

58 

504 

358 

263 

1, 434 

378, 804. 70 

1858. 

122 

46 

431 

400 

226 

1, 225 

242, 286. 69 

1859. 

89 

28 

297 

284 

172 

870 

156, 602. 33 

I860. 

no 

36 

372 

289 

264 

1,071 

212, 892.'48 

1861. 

110 

38 

360 

371 

264 

1, 143 

233, 194. 35 

1862 . 

60 

17 

207 

397 

183 

864 

175, 075. 84 

1863. 

97 

34 

212 

1, 113 

367 

1,823 

310, 884. 34 

1864.. 

112 

45 

322 

1,389 

498 

2, 366 

415, 740. 64 

1865.. 

109 

46 

369 

853 

411 

1, 788 

383, 805. 60 

1866. 

96 

61 

457 

926 

348 

1 , 888 

336,146. 56 

1867 . 

95 

70 

517 

657 

180 

1, 519 

303, 528. 66 

1868. 

80 

48 

590 

848 

236 

1,802 

285, 304. 73 

1869. 

91 

36 

506 

816 

277 

1,726 

275, 230. 05 

1870. 

73 

27 

519 

709 

290 

1 , 618 

276, 953. 31 

1871 . 

40 

14 

498 

901 

302 

1, 755 

273, 226. 51 

1872 . 

15 

10 

426 

900 

292 

1, 643 

209, 052. 22 

1873 . 

28 

9 

611 

1,221 

402 

2,271 

359, 245. 76 

1874 . 

71 

22 

655 

995 

404 

2,147 

432, 725.17 

1875 . 

114 

22 

502 

340 

323 

1, 301 

297, 638. 79 

1876 . 

76 

5 

424 

269 

338 

1 , 112 

203, 585. 63 

1877 . 

71 

4 

337 

352 

265 

1,029 

176, 591.96 

1878 . 

81 

7 

279 

557 

334 

1, 258 

235. 503. 57 

1879 . 

37 

10 

256 

494 

335 

1, 132 

193, 030. 69 

18g0 . 

23 

2 

286 

243 

348 

902 

157,409. 90 

1881. 

29 

3 

318 

314 

444 

1,108 

280, 458. 64 



































































































































282 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


Fa. 


No. 149 .—Tonnage of vessels built in the United States, from 185/ to 1851, inclusive. 


[From Annual Reports of the Register of the Treasury.! 



| 

.Tonnage built. 

% 

Year ended June .30— 

On the 
New Eng¬ 
land 
Coast. 

On the 
entiie 
seaboard. 

On the 
Mississip¬ 
pi River 
and its 
tribu¬ 
taries. 

On the 
Great 
Lakes. 

Total. 

iav7 

—#- 

Tons. 
183, 625 
103, 862 

Tons. 
285, 453 

Tons. 

41,854 

Tons. 

51, 498 

Tons. 
378, 805 


177,353 

33,292 

31, 642 

242, 287 


79, 322 
134, 289 
104 675 

133,294 

17,128 

6,180 

156,602 

I860 . 

109. 836 

31, 064 

11,992 

212, 892 


179, 767 

29, 960 

23, 467 

233,199 


45, 595 
79, 576 
112,611 
132, 885 

112,487 

8 , 785 

53, 804 

175, 076 


215, 505 

27, 407 

67, 972 

310, 884 

1865 . 

310, 421 
280, 511 

56,169 
66 , 576 

49, 151 
36,719 

415, 741 
383, 806 


121, 333 

232, 388 

70, 555 

33, 204 

'336,147 


135, 189 

230,810 

35,106 

37,613 

303, 529 

1868 . . 

98, 708 

175, 812 

52, 695 

56, 798 

285, 305 

1869 . 

103, 604 

191, 194 

34, 576 

49, 460 

275, 230 

1870 . 

110, 584 
64,366 

182, 836 

56, 859 

37,258 

276, 953 

1871 . 

156, 249 

73, 080 

43, 897 

273, 226 

1872 . . . .- - . 

46, 269 

128, 097 

36, 344 

44, 611 

209, 052 


76, 406 
136, 251 
151,497 
95, 288 
90, 992 

218,139 

48, 659 

92, 448 

359, 246 

187fi . .. 

277, 093 
244, 474 
163, 826 

63, 646 
23, 294 
23, 636 

91, 986 
29, 871 
16, 124 

432, 725 
297, 639 
203, 586 

1877_ 


132, 996 

34, 693 

8 , 903 

176, 592 

1878. 

90, 386 

155,138 

68 , 928 

11,438 

235, 504 

1879 .. 

1880 . 

1881. 

55, 874 
46, 374 
54, 488 

115, 683 
101, 719 
125, 766 

62, 213 
32, 791 
81, 189 

15,135 
22, 899 
73. 504 

193, 031 
157,400 
280, 459 


No. 150 .—Tonnage of iron sailing and steam vessels built in the United States, from 1869 to 

1881, inclusive. 

[From Annual Reports of the Register of the Treasury. 


1869. 

1870. 

1871. 
1872 
1873. 

1874 

1875 

1876. 

1877. 

1878. 

1879. 

1880. 
1881. 


Year ended June 30— 


Sailing 

vessels. 


Tons. 


1, 039 
679 

2, 067 


44 

36 


Steam 

vessels. 


Total. 


Tons. Tons. 

3, 545 4, 584 

7,602 8,281 

13, 412 15, 479 

12,766 12,766 

26, 548 26, 548 

33, 097 33, 097 

21,632 21,632 

21,346 21,346 

5, 927 5, 927 

26, 960 26, 960 

22,008 22,008 

25, 538 25, 582 

28,320 1 28,356 











































































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


283 


'O' 








£ 

•<>> 

<© 


<^a 

o 


<^> 


b 

•♦h 


ci 

-*-> 

O 

H 


ci 

-M 

o 

H 



®-s 


3? 


oo 


cn 

$ •«* 
•S r 
!° oo 

S3 

s> ^ 

•g ° 

C* 

O* 

^ 00 

r-H 

•S £ 

or £2 

p-2 ^ 

o<b 

00 ^ 

r-^. »^5 

<© 

GO ^ 
30' O 
^ <S 

r-» 

2i <© 

<•- Nj 

s § 

S*i QN. 

GO 


2?: 


*n 

'w 

GO 

-H* 

•w 

GU 

£ 
*♦«•» 
00 
• *w 

ST5 


p* 

P>J 

O 

F—* 

Ph 


© 

© 

bJO 

ci 

p 

p 

o 

H 


© 

w 

a 

»H 

+3 

P 

t(j 

© 

i-< 

•-S 

.a 


ci 

h> 

o 

H 


3 

ci 

© 

+-> 

r/} 


t>s 

r—^ 

Jh 

5 • 

Ph © 

r rt 1 p 

3 g 

ci .5 

© a 

3 & 

§ © 

-p 

© <2 

■+■* © 
- P2 

.3 ^ 

>>p 

—■ • pH 

-P 

ci 
r* . 


ci 

4— 

o 

r* 

cr» 


ci 

© 

+3 


© 

rr 

ri 

+» 

© 

3 

c 

,P 

© 

,P 


bC 

C 

»H 
• p-H 

Ci 

CO 


ci 

-H> 

o 

H 


S 

ci 

a; 

4P 

Ul 


bjj 

P 


ci 

m 


o' 

<© 


o 

GO 

~- 

**»w 

sr 

*4 


CC 

© 


Cq01^^t'WOt^'M01C5a»0*f05Q0HM0CTt-C0OH00t-X(M'MX^ , C0t'M 
- CO X X c: G G X Tf O « C5 a G 'O O i5 O CO C •- *0 O C5 X C5 lO CO Cl W G O 

. M OI CJ OC O O -- O rp Cl ^ C M C^l ^ X ^ W H iO C O LO ^ H CO X 1C Ci 

CC - r ^ 

^ ^ 9 ° ° G ° ^ ^ ^ H Ci CO lO X 00 Ol CO ^ 1^ 05 W r-iCC - CD if, CO 05 ^ O 

Ov)WCOCCCOCM05iOr-(OJCOlOiQ|>aOOiCC:^iOiOC004tCOasC5?-iW^ , tOJ 

O CO CO L^ L^ C5 i-i Cl CO d d CO Tf Cl *<t Tf Tf O U0 lO GO t'- X X 05 i-h Cl d CO Tf 

cf cf cf CO* CO CO Co" ^" Tf Tt -r{ r^ Tf Tt IfT lC lo io" iff »ff if Iff i.f if" iff irficf o co~ o' co" co" 

HOHOOJ'OiOCC^NTt^W-WOiCON^OOOCOTt-W'ftX'^OO^iOUO 

ci x t - c c: l': iCj o o ^ 0 jj q »o c; a h h n ci o o o io : (M cc o oo oi io co oo 

.CC!Oh*WCJCOOCCNiO^HM-Q?000{0©COO^aOrtO^OH^l' 


ss CO ’** 1-0 0C C^l cc - 
oOO^^thhqc: 
^Hf-'HHiMoiC'ir 


--CJC5a'-HHCOHt*WrtfOaOlCO^^Ol>OH'^H 

:000«C^OnMOrfr^(M»CCQHOOdTht-t^OCOOJN 

5COCOCOCO^tr^uOGOl>t>OOQOOOO<MlOOCOOOOOO»-HCOiOC5 


HHrHHHHHHlN Cl Cl Cl 


HC)^^t-Orr(MC5XC10r^r-«CCinclC^OiOHXTt<^^rrXC5XO(MOO 
WCOC5CO<MiOHCJHCOCS^rHOCU^i^'^MCIP*rf<lOOTtOOlOTf05l>r}GO 
. O 1C 50 X ’t Cl O H O lO H LO O IQ Tj- o O CO Cl H W a H K5 io O r- o O r}- h 

XCIOIC-'Cr-UOOOCClOO^ CC C. C ifi r- ^ 1^ c CO IO G G Tt^ o 00 O 00 o c 

O 00 CO — *—i »—i i O Cl CO >0 I - lO h H 00 X O O X Cl l" ^ ’t *t C CC ’T Cl CO !'•* r-i LO o 

^ C O d Cl IO if; t- X X 05 X X Q O Cl i.'Ct- L- O O O i.O CO d COOHHOaiXO 

cf CO co" co" co" co" co" co" co" co" co" co" co" Tt Tf rf Tt" T*" 'rf rf" ^t" CO CO" CO" 


GCCl^'^OHHOJ-Or^rcOP-fC^XTt<05CCG^Oh«OO-* , Oi-0XO'^ 
CO C«1 C. O Cl Cl ' : n.OXCi *t X C ci 'X; Cl O a Cl Cl X IO I- o O o O IO X X 
.O^XCOWHCJOHOOlCCOOl'TK'.COXCOXrti'OCOQCOTjaOHniON 
Cc ____ _____ 


si c: oo cc o: 


ri X O X !■' O Cl O Cl 1^ X Cl O 051^ LO C CO Cl r- LO co c: X N 05 CC 

^ x x’t a ».o « a o x -t x i' ci ^ c io o o c in ci th c x o c ci x ^ x n o 

^o^coTt-t-i-OH^ ci ci o rn co c o h ci ci ci ci oc: rt o io t-x o o ci *f 


ClClClClClClCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO^tT^Tt^^^Tt‘^'^^i'rt'rt^iOiOiOiO 


COXIOC. aCCGCO-HGGLOO-JHXL'iClCOO’tMOOX’tHTtHaX 
axe. o.xoi-cociocicco^O’tccixcix^r-.N^fHicccHciCit-N 
. O c. CO I* »c CI' .X O X IO rji Tf CO Cl Cl O TT Cl O ^ C5 X Cl Cl ci O IO H 

gXLOociioc.XNXt^^NwxHOMfoooa^ooiooowoat'Hoax 

> i- -t c x ci cr - i- c o h h d m ci >o o h *t a r. x a r. ^ x ci h o x h 

^ ^ r -1 ci Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl CO CO CC TMO LO O O CO c; r- CO LO rf o X O Cl O 


HHHHHHHC1C1C1 



Mr. K-: c ci ci ci o x o c ci w co ci o cc g o a ci o ci o a h c 

a a x ci M' x ci o - h a ci -r ci h * 2 i lc rt h i- w cc c o't x © o o 

X05C0«D05OOdTfC0ClC0i0ClOCi«<-it^h»i0^nt'ClClriOi0^l0 
r-" iff iff of of Cl" o" of of ^ GO co" GC Cl" of cf «-T Gc" t-H oo of go" cf cf co" Til" —T go" cf rf Iff 

XGOGO'-O^OCICOOOCrtCCCl-^’^rHCOt^ ' rHOSCICOGOCOCOCJOO 

ci co *o o i- a a c a x x oj ci lo o co o ^ go ^ ci ci h o n ci ci ci o a i- 

cf Cl" ci c f cf cf cf co" cf cf cf cf co co" co" co" co" co" co" co" co" co co" co" cf cf cf cf CO ci" c f 


o a ci p o a a o -< r, h a ?o m o a o h n h co to t' c in a r o r-i^cocio 
. a co x h lo lc n a a a »o rf ^ co co ci go -t r-. 05 o o c *o a o x ci co x 

«c -t O O H O Cl GO 1 * 03 M X C5 ^ a a O C CO O O X't G a H (O o L- GO io h CO 

.... 

S CO' ^ ci oo ci 05 co go t#* io t— «o »-o »o OMCin^Gocnooxr-oiCQ-o 

l_. oo ci o *>c ci m h x io o io i’- h o ‘m ci o a c a w c *+ i* h x’t h c t- 

^ Cl Cl Cl n rH CJ Cl H *-« H Cl Cl Cl CO CO CO CO Cl Cl CO CO rf CO CO CO CO CO Cl Cl Cl Cl rH 


05 00 GO ^ O to Cl Cl 05 -** CO ct ^ CO ^ IO O *+ CO x* 1^ 1C ^ CO uo 1-0' O GO CC Ci 

. co a ci io r: c o »c o m o ci o ^ ^ ci a o ic c h go co a c g ci h a a h 

G01OC1O5C1C1*—IIO — C0GOr-H00O5TflOO5ClrHCl»—'C500C5COTfClCOiO00O5^lOlO 

§ if tf -*t »f I—" of cf go" o" o" r-i 05* **f of co" go" co" o" o" cf GO CO lO co"cc io -f cc" CO 

1 -H H Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl CO CC •+ ’t 1C C L>* O lO Cl a a ^ CO O O X GO o 

~ 1—1 H’H r-i r—I r—I i—I 

^i-HCOr-o^'^ood0500GOci05coio>iC5t^Go»--o;cicocor^iC'Ci»^GO'^t— 

. i.co a ci h x *-< a o c gig h ci a a •'t ci ■'t x c go c co io h g g ci co g 
CC 05 CO GO X X •—I 1 —! ^ r-t GO t'- lO IO rf —< Cl r-< X C5 X GO 00 IQ GO Cl CO lO 00 t>- O lO 00 

52 d Cl t-" go"C l o Cl Cl cc' Cl GO 05 GO 'Tf 30 Cl CC 05 O cc CO GO io Tt r-H to rt cc CO CC Cl GO 

x ci c o c h o o x 55 ci ^’t x a x t- a ^ x x x o o a x t- ^ ci m o 

^dddrHi—iddrHHr—IrHddddddd^ddddddddr-lr-iT-Hr—Irlr- 


»o CO rH 05 CO ^ co GO GO Cl 05 co GO GO Cl GO O CO t- ^ t- X O Cl CC oi Cl 00 t- io Cl 05 o 
.HiO®OPH^r^OiOX«0^0>Hr40©H«OMHWO'thC.I>C5iOiOOO 
^XH't'txp*io^^xdc:ioco»oaC'iriPOco , tccGOco«-«coLOG5coHxci 

- (jC r-f t f cc t^" of co" r—" cf oo oo co" »f if of o" r-f co" cc of t—" cf cf Tjfcfr^Tjf'ofofofoi go" 

h ci o c t'* -t ^ x co p- o r- co n ‘O ri rr go a io co cg i' c c — io co co c d *-< 
CS t'*t > *^*t''t'*l>t>l>XXXC50)XX0ia050i0>050505O05050iC505050l0)05 


Cl 
—» 
o 


05 GO O GO 1-1 
. x a ri o r- 
Go O H CC GO rf 

5 -t -rf X go" if ^ P*cic 
P to O GO X lO LO GO C. C. 


L^GOHOt-^lOOCOXC^^iOrjiOlOOMOCliOCOdOXX 

ri - x m gc io a H c o t- a co x ^ d a to io (N io io a o x 

’tGO^^XfflhOCXt'HdC'iahH’tdlOPddOOCO^ 


o 

05 


cf m I s * io ^ ^'t x h o lo x lo a r- h co o co a 

a c o c ci « -t lo lo a t- a o n ^ cc c "t co co 

*—i r—i t—< r—< t— i r —1 t—I i—I i—i d d d d Cl Cl Cl d Cl d 


w h ro ci oi x o io w d a h.go a x rt< a cc a c: d io cuo a o cc ^ co ci h ci 

^i io ’tb c h ci go ti rH ri i>- n ci x o cc oci -f X't x c c a >o't ci c x o a 

cc a go x cc h x a c co lo Tt a io c 6 h h cc lo a cc h ci o i-. p- 

| if co" if r-T of Tf —f of t-" x" t-" r-r cf h cf of if co" of Tf" go" go" t- 2 -2 S Sr gf 98 92 P 

c:GOOXoxaaHaxt-dcct^xaHccoi-pNa^aHOw.aoa : 

^ GO GCCH C GO O t' H I' h X X H H P H X X X t'h* L- H o t'* h O H ^ W 
















• 

9 

• 9 


• 

• 

• 

9 

• 

• 

ft 

9 

• 

• 

0 

9 













• 

1 

9 

9 

9 

9 9 

9 

9 

i 

9 

9 

• 

9 

9 

9 

9 

• 

• 

« • 









9 

• 

• 


9 

9 

t 

• 

9 


9 

9 

1 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

t 

9 

« 

• • 










• 


9 

9 

9 

• 

9 

9 

• 9 

• 

9 

9 

• 

9 

• 

9 

• 

9 

0 

• 

• 

• i 









9 

9 

f 

f 


9 

• 

• 

9 

• 9 

• 

• 


• 

9 

9 

• 

• 

• 

• 

0 

• 

• i 









9 


9 

• 

9 

9 

• 

• 

9 

9 9 

9 

9 

• 

9 

9 

9 

9 

• 

9 

9 

• 

9 

9 








• 


• 



% 


9 

1 

9 


9 

1 

9 

I 

• 

9 

9 

• 

• 

% 

9 

i 

• 9 






1 


9 

9 

• 


1 


• 

• 

• 

9 

• # 

9 

9 

• 

• 

• 

9 

9 

• 

• 

9 

• 

9 

• • 








9 




• 

• 

9 

9 

• 

1 

* 9 

9 

9 

• 


• 

9 

• 

• 

• 

0 

0 

• 

* « 










• 

• 

• 

9 

• 

9 

1 

9 

• 9 

9 

9 

9 


i 

• 

9 

9 

9 

• 

9 

• 

» • 






• 



9 

9 


1 

9 

f 

9 

• 

9 

9 9 

9 

• 

9 

9 

i 

• 

9 

• 

9 

f 

« 

i 

• • 






1 

• 


• 

9 


9 

9 


• 

9 

9 

• 9 

9 

9 

9 

9 


9 

• 

• 

9 

0 

« 

9 

• • 






• 



• 


• 

• 

1 

• 

• 

9 

• 

• • 

i 

9 

9 

9 

9 

• 

• 

• 

9 

9 


9 

• i 



• 

• 

( 

• 

• 

i 

• 

• 

9 

t 

• 

9 

9 

• 

9 

* • 

9 


9 

• 

• 

9 


« 

• 

9 

• 

9 

• i 



• 

• 

1 

• 

• 

• 

1 

9 

• 

9 

• 

• 


• 

9 

, • 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

• 

• 

• 

9 


• 

• • 













9 

9 

• 

9 

» 

• 

• 

• 

9 

• 

9 

• 

9 

9 

i 

t 


9 

i • 









• 

• 

9 

• 

• 

9 

9 

• 

9 

• 9 

9 

9 

1 

9 

I 

9 

• 

• 

i 

9 

* 

0 

9 9 

















• 

9 9 

9 

i 

9 

• 

9 

9 

9 

9 

• 

9 

9 


9 0 










9 

• 

9 

• 

1 

• 

• 

9 

/ . 

1 

9 

9 

9 

9 

1 

9 

9 

• 

9 

0 

• 

i • 






1 


• 


• 

• 


9 

• 

• 

9 

9 

• • 

• 

• 

• 


9 

• 

1 

• 

• 

9 

0 

• 

« • 








9 



• 



• 

9 

t 

9 

9 9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

• 

9 

9 

9 

• 

• 

* 

• • 














1 


• 

• 

t i 

9 

• 

9 

• 

• 

9 

9 

9 

i 

9 

9 

t 

• • 









9 

9 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

9 

9 

• • 

• 


9 

9 

9 

1 

• 

9 

• 

• 

9 

• 

• 0 








9 


9 

• 


9 

• 


9 

9 

• • 

• 

9 

9 

9 



4 

9 

i 

9 

0 

1 

• • 









• 

9 

• 

• 

• 

9 

9 

• 

9 

fl 1 

1 

9 

9 



9 

• 

• 


• 


1 

• • 









t 

9 



• 

1 

• 

• 

9 

1 • 

• 

9 

1 

9 


1 

• 

9 

* 

9 

9 

9 

• * 













9 


9 

9 

9 

• i 

9 

9 

9 

9 



• 

1 

9 

• 

0 

9 

• • 









• 

9 


• 

9 

• 

• 

9 

• 

t 9 

9 

9 

« 

9 

9 


9 

9 

i 

• 

0 

9 

• • 









9 

• 



i 

1 

• 

• 

9 

9 9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

• 


• 

9 

0 

• 

9 

§ 4 













9 

1 

9 

• 

9 

9 9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

• 

9 

9 

• 

1 

• 

* < 









1 

9 


• 

• 

9 

• 

9 

9 

• 9 


9 

• 

• 

9 


9 

9 

9 

• 

9 

• 

• « 










• 

1 

• 

• 


9 

• 

• 

• • 


9 

\ • 

• 

9 


9 

C 

• 

» 


• 

i i 









• 

• 


* 

• 

9 

i 

9 

9 

• t 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

4 

9 

9 


» 


• 

• i 













9 

1 

9 

9 

1 

• • 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

• 

9 

9 

9 

t 

* 

9 

• « 










t 

• 

• 


9 

• 


9 

« 9 

9 

9 

1 

9 

• 


9 

9 

ft 

0 

9 

9 

9 • 










9 

9 

• 

t 


9 

9 


9 

• 

9 

• 

9 

9 

9 

9 

• 

9 

• 

9 


1 9 



O 'n^nMHiOGO^XaOHdCO^iOGOt^XaOHClCC^OGO^XaOH 

2 IP 10 lO LO iO iC tO GO GO GO GO GO GD GO GO GO GO P* t'* h» h« l> l'* t'- h» X X 

Sxxccxxxxxooxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxccx 


g'S 

rP O 

Ph 

V O' 

f 

■£$ b 

£ cpq 

© o ^ 

°So 

^ p ^ 

rP 

O ci s 
-P 

GX ^ R 

x? a 

GO <© n 

® . * 
"p .tz 
P'S 

Tj GO • 

r-H O 

(X f-4 ^ 

Mpq 

r 3 r d 

p p 

a ci 

p © 

-P p: 

H 


X 


0) 


•H © 

4^P 
M 43 
G*-» 
X ° 

X 
Ci -*-> 
(O •<-* 

>-S 
u S 
.2 © 


ci 

© 


-*H 

p 

© 

© 


«2 ^ 

s| 

•H X 
Hi 

© o 

p, 

o ° 
a ^ 
§ ° 
° a* 

© ro 

p fcJO 

i.s 

o ^ 
^ © 

rr 43 

ci -m 
jh d 

gt3 
© © 
tup: 

S- o 

"S GX 

Tr® 

p 

© rs 


5- 

^p 

rP g 

r0. x 

<u © 

ci *c; 
pH P 

© bX) 

C- ”~ 4 
p4 ,x 

el 

© © 

^ e 

x o 

•iH X 

-p ^ 

H © 

I ^ 

l H 

H 

H . 
O x 

fc c 


X 


£ 


OrP 

TO © 

ci P 

<«H X 


H 

» 

H 

p 

K 

fi 

>* 

X 

p 

GQ 

w 

54 

H 


, Bureau of Statistics, November 10, 1882, 






































































































284 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


Statement of vessels built in the United States from 1840 to 1882, inclusive. 


Year ending— 

Sail in 

g vessels. 

Steam vessels. 

Total. 


No. 

Tons. 

No. Tons. 

No. 

Tons. 

Sept. 30, 1840.. 

808 

106, 518. 35 

87 14,685.51 

895 

121,203.86 

1841. 

685 

100 , 117.12 

108 23,543.81 

793 

123,660.93 

1842. 

887 

105, 256. 15 

140 24,550.15 

1,027 

129,806.30 

June 30,1843. 

404 

50, 050. 52 

79 13, 837. 67 

483 

63, 888. 24 

1844. 

603 

71, 506. 66 

163 32,030.58 

766 

103,537.29 

1845. 

875 

112, 362. 08 

163 33,680.38 

1, 038 

146, 042. 46 

1846. 

1, 195 

141 j 844. 22 

225 1 46* 359. 71 

l' 420 

188’ 203. 93 

1847. 

1,400 

193, 403. 38 

197 50,230.02 

1, 597 

1 243,633.40 

1848. 

1, 676 

265, 549. 53 

175 52, 526. 01 

1,851 

308, 075, 54 

1849. 

], 339 

213, 970. 81 

215 43,018.01 

1, 554 

256, 988. 82 

1850. 

1, 225 

227, 997. 51 

197 I 51,’258. 35 

1,422 

279’ 255. 86 

1851. 

1,123 

221,145. 89 

245 78,326.47 

1, 368 

299, 472. 41 

1852. 

1,184 

269, 821. 81 

268 85,534.33 

1, 452 

355, 356. 19 

1853. 

1,437 

332, 339. 12 

280 I 95, 155. 67 

1,717 

427, 494. 79 

1854. 

1,493 

417, 216. 26 

284 88.829.82 

1,777 

536, 046.13 

1855. 

1, 781 

510, 689. 67 

246 72, 760. 32 

2. 027 

583, 450. 04 

1856. 

1,482 

404, 054. 39 

232 65, 239 34 

1,714 

469, 293. 73 

1857. 

1, 171 

304, 345.18 

272 74, 459. 52 

1, 443 

378, 804. 70 

1858.. 

999 

179, 338. 53 

242 65, 374. 34 

1,241 

244, 712. 87 

1859. 

698 

121, 296. 83 

177 35.305.45 

875 

156, 602. 33 

1860. 

807 

145, 427. 58 

275 69. 370. 07 

1 , 082 

214, 797. 65 

1861. 

880 

172, 207. 94 

266 60, 986. 36 

1,146 

233. 194. 35 

1862. 

681 

119. 626. 67 

183, 55,449.17 

864 

175, 075. 84 

1863. 

1,456 

216, 812. 14 

360 | 94,233.67 

1,816 

311, 045. 81 

1864. 

1 , 8C8 

268, 240. 76 

520 147.499.83 

2, 388 

415, 740. 64 

1865. 

1, 378 

248, 904. 35 

411 145.696.35 

1, 789 

394, 600. 70 

1866.. 

1,540 

210, 962. 84 

358 1 125,183.72 

1, 898 

336, 146. 56 

1867. 

1, 339 

233, 584. 53 

179 I 72,010.33 

1, 518 

305, 594. 86 

1868. 

1, 566 

221, 364. 67 

236 63, 940. 06 

1 , 802 

285, 304. 73 

1869. 

1,448 

210, 164.16 

279 65,065.99 

1, 727 

275, 230.15 

1870. 

1, 328 

206, 332. 39 

290 70, 620. 92 

1,618 

276, 953. 31 

1871. 

l, 453 

185, 384. 02 

302 87, 842. 49 

1,755 i 

273. 226. 51 

1872. 

1,351 

*46, 842, 57 

292 62,209.65 

1, 643 

209, 052. 22 

1873.. 

1, 869 

271, 235.10 

402 88,010.66 

2, 271 

359, 245. 76 

1874. 

1, 743 

330, 795. 25 

404 101, 929. 92 

2, 147 

432, 725.17 

1875. 

978 

235, 178. 95 

323 62,459.84 

1, 301 

297, 639. 79 

1876. 

774 

134, 333. 72 

338 69,251.91 1 

1 , 112 

203, 585. 63 

1877. •--- 

764 

129, 077. 45 

265 47, 514. 51 

1, 029 

176, 591. 96 

1878. 

924 

153, 643. 97 

334 81,859.60 

1.258 

235, 503. 57 

1879. 

797 

106, 669.34 

335 86,361,35 

1, 132 

193, 030. 69 

1880 . 

554 

78, 556. 20 

348 78, 853. 70 

902 

157, 409. 90 

1881. 

664 

162, 388. 09 

444 118,070.55 

1 , 108 

280, 458. 64 

1882. 

869 

160, 427. 07 

502 121,842.66 

1 371 

282, 269. 73 


Register’s Office, November 14, 1882. 


W. P. TITCOMB, 

Register. 


/ 






































































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


285 


GO 

00 


GO 


§ 

o 


Qo 

•fO 


o 


s 


oo 

*■*«— 

4§ 






0 > 


O’ 

Oo 

**w 

5 

6 

oo 

o 

'S .£ 

>> 00 

o 

h cr 

O 

?r 

SS 

o 

-K* 

s: 

—«. 


03 

-*-3 

o 


a 

c3 

u 

o 

a 

03 

•rH 

<v 

a 

<1 


Jf:£!2n!3t£: ;co ^ l ^ l>C0 ’-' OCir '-^ , ^ lCC| CT*xi^t^03rH 
CO ^ O X O W 00 C'J X OC M X X O CO »C' O X Ol Ct “M 
0SMCHOW^rf05^C0lCC)^H^C5t>-?0 — Oi-^lOrHCOlO 

cc rf'cc co o of *-Tto'r-fco x”co”rH r-To’ h-” of H' of co”iff co' o'x” —”o' 

S £» £ 2 ' ^ oiocioooioco in coi^ocooo^hoccc© ic oo 

2 CO W 05 O C r- M n 00 O Ol iO O c: h W C r- rf »Q MM © 
^ r*<” T* H*” iff rf tjT rt 1 " -* CO iff O iff CO CO CO t> X* o' of of o” iH Co” iff iff 


. Oi 

50 

£ —* 

o X 


’-^OOCOTtr-tCO^t^CO*—iiOCOCO — C Ifl C1 CC O H N w o o 
WOOClUIOCC*-ifJOO)^CiOTtXrMCX05«'^CO^ 
r-O3O3rHC0l^H’COH’COCOC0O3iOCOO7O3 — t^*-“ - —* -* 


L- H< rH H 


»— 1 »—» l fc 03 lOic-'iOioacico'teori'h-Nf'OJOiooi 
ic Cl C Cl Cl O 1C ^ OS •*+ CO iC ifc O X H* rH X 03 IC O ’t H 
OfOWOiMOOOOHTt-trfCOiO^CiCOCiC 0,0 T— OS 

cd co cd cc” of of r-T r-T rH of of of of of oi of oi of of of cc” co” cc”of 


bJC 

>rH 

V 


- s & 

^11 

<H 


CO 

CO 

. o. 

5C „ 

§§> 

^4^ 


Cl CO -' CC IC ^ O ^ lO *>D ^ CO C O rf CO ».C h* O H* O 03 
OW050Tt-H^^CCC:ClOOOT}<!DHCCCI050)05COC5 

rH OW0505t^O©OOXC0050WT|i^OHOOWHCO 


l'- i-0 00 CO «—• t- oi — O iO 07 L— c *o H tMC X X 
X0005MCC0J'-HHClO^H05X«?:05ifi00'tCl 
Cl iC C^ IT, LO X C CJ r-( ^ r-i lO X fO r- o O Cl 1^- -I* l-C 


CC r-l rH 

rH —* r—i 

0QI’ <N 00 CO CO CO CO t* ifj ift t> CO CO t> 0C o” of of 


. io co no 03 x co io io »o 03 — x co h< o io co 03 03 03 o: o: t> 

Cc X O r-i CO O O Cl i 1 lO h CC 05 O O IC ^ I' Cl 'C Oi lO N o 

^ X t' i.O lO O N -t- H -o 05 C5 rH CO 0V| C O. O. N O t- LC X r- .*0 

£ 

tCi 03 


r-i Ol 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 r*i H' CO ^ nt< t#< CO 


*H 

o 

A 


<x> 

<n 

l* 1 

a 

tl 


a0C0C0XOi0W03C300OC005OCDN(MC0H»^C0^05»0 
5C CC H* CD »C Ol CO X 7 CC05 01rj-C0l>05C0OrHC0'Tt«0303l0T*im 
5SC0C00503C0C0^#«50i005 05i-H05rH03 03OC03CI>05 05i0TrTt< 
o 

k-^COrt<COi003fc*C005COCOCOeO»-l03^CO^CO^^-»-ll>TfT#« 

HrlfMHHClHClHMn 


ra 

00 


c3 

Q 


ra 

Q 

-4-3 


• I'- O t'- ^ O Cl ’f ’’t Ol lO Tt* CO CO H Ol Ol O 05 00 H 03 H O O t> 

^XCCHOiOOiOHCOCCOO^OOCOOr-^^-^Cl^iOTt 

S oo O lO CO CO o: t- 03 X l - Ol Tt O X CO Ol iO CO in lO 50 CO 05 
O - .......... .. - 

kj C O 05 C Ci C5 CO I.C ^ O C - HifiXOClClOrnHiflOCO 
rH r —1 CO rH ‘ t—• rH rH *H rH rH 03 03 rH r—< 03 03 Tt^ t— CO 


> 


iftWO^OOOCOOOHHCOOOSOCOOOOJHHOOCON-'O 
l'- »0 CO O Ol 1.0 r- CO iO iO 00 40 CO 03 -rf iO CO CO ^1 X <o «—. to O 
X CO CO lO 1.0 CO 03 05 03 03 ^ 03 05 05 03 tn h 05 CO CO H CO t*« rH tJ4 


O CO 


t^05OO3C0rt*C0t^03C0 0I^C0C0r-<C0C0C0C0 05C0I>O 
*-h HHHOJHHHHHHHH "H H 1 CO CO CO L''“ 05 O 03 


HC5rti0 03 0iC 05 05 05 - 05 CH>03C--C1^05t^OCOCCH 


.2 

cc 

cc 

3 

PS 

* teHOlXiOiCOWMOH'NOJXiCWCCWiftMOH'CCOt^lM 
giOH’r.Xl^H"tC'100iCTrOrLOCOCOHWOCJWCCr)'H' 

f^Hifj 03' of 03 CO Ih r- cf CO C h 03 IH co 03 03 rH X CO* iC H* H 03 

^ nHH 03 CO rH rH rH HdiflMONt^COOOO 

rH rH 

• 

a 

c3 

JaJO 

'S 

pq 

t^i0 05CLOOWN>CH-XC3 0lTfOCOXHMH , OOiOh*H 
te«OiCH'05riHTfOH , O05^OOWXMCCONX^M 
g CC CO O CO C5 t'- H 1 OCHXCOXCOHt'-COCOiOh'tH'H'iO 

t? 07 T* CO Hjf 03 CO CO of rH 03 CO CO X CO T- CO 03 07 — co” 

nn HH*X05 05 03C0 01 tH ! 

r- H 03 03 


riMMH-COMCh^HOCOhOlH'OHH'CJC: O 05 lO 05 


M ic CC CO X H o 05 C Ol CO C 05 03 1C [-h 03 r— Oi 05 if. X iC o 


4 CO rH -H H* O 03 CO lO 03 ifS 03 O CO 03 CO Ol 03 CO CO iO CO X C CO 05 


rP r-T of CO iO NX CO C CO t>- X X X 07 X H 03 N N 05 O H 03 CO* 'O 

^ 4-> 

rH COOI rH CCN»CC51 CCOh0005 


rH rH rH 03 03 03 r—I 


r^ 

QQ 


c 3 

P- 

Xfl 


o 

p 

<V 


X 05 t- 


CO X 


_ _ _ _^ Tt OC C5 X Cl CO C3 Ol CO « LO H iC M Ol CD CO 

ydic.cioi-cicr^ i-O 03 x o 03 i-O co co 03 1.0 h* x ift 05 co 

^ X M> 'C X CO CO M' O 1C ic C X h 05 05 h O if. 1C H 

.o r-f of r-fT cf co” co” 05 ” oi co” of o” r-” cc x” of r-T of of co x” x' 


cl — f 

H CO CO c 


CO CO 03 


H Ol 05 03 CO t> X Ol 05 O 03 05 05 X Ol h* 

03 03 


o 

£ 

5» 

• 

a 

a 

• fH 
-j 

♦s 

^5 

C^ 

+=> 

M 


o 

rd 

• 

Norwe¬ 
gian and 
Swedish. 

«K> 

a 

a 

s 

=^3 

u 

05 

O 

br 

o 
• ^ 

• 

rP 

CO 

• r* 

-4w 

1? 

’£ 

CO 


"»r5 . 

No. 140.- 

Tear endei 
Juno 30— 


l^- co t- h 00 03 X ifO ifO h* Ol CO lO 03 CO X H CC t'* O X 05 l> 05 

c; C5 H x lO 05 O - W H M h X CO H C'H'* ^ h O H o M H O 

2 M ^ Tt LC M O CO X 1^ X iO Cl CO H iC ^ 05 O ^ lO X O C CO X 

-P 05 ” co” of co” iff hT oi' o” Iff r-T CO rH of H rr” of o” 1 ^-” x” 07 ” »f5 ^4 H*” CO Tt” 

h 03 H 03 03 H H C3 CO CO to X 05 H Ol ^ CO 05 CO Oi rjH W O 

rH rH rH rH rH 03 Ol 03 03 CO 


NCOMHiOif5 0Mf5C5Tj*OONCOOO)^050t-t-Hfl5H 
Er* ^1 CO »C' O Cl CO X CO — LC 4 O X C X H CO Cl C3 05 Cl h- 07 h CO 
HCOt^Xi-OXWHiOXt'ClMiOX^OCCCCH'Ot-iCTfHX 

r-° i ff Iff co” rH co” -rf t-” of o” Co” 05* O 05” r-” 03 r-T H-” io” Of r-” X x” o” of x” 

^hHCOCOHHCJHOI^COW^^iOHCO^CDOMH^hlO 

HHCO W03Tt<iC»OC0C0 


-H 00 05 XHOrtCOW^OlO^OCHOr-XOClt-iOXX 

XOt-t'05HCCCOr}.HCO^C5t-COCOXOCOCC05^^0 t- 
Ol 04 C5 O *t Cl CC CO M O H O O iC 03 X h X C5 05 O M 05 05 O 

h of of h*” of 05 ” r-” 06 co” co” co” x” of of r>*” i>T oo” x of 05*” >ff o co” of h< io 

grtw«coN».owN««®®o®«j 5 g«g-J3ggg 


XHXXiOO^CC»OC0 03rfWi00^05XXOOXOO« 

r^H'03 030305»0C0t'-I^C0»f:O01C0^H'OrHC0C0£2 C Slt C $ 

0 9 rM^»f5XC005C<5»0 03i0XCC^tC0aC0^C3XOh*C1XC0i0 

£ _T o x” o” x” co' CO iff o” of H x” t-” of of of o” o” of co” co” o” co” of of 

.o s o 1 ^“ r (N »*0 H C5 C3 H I' O N co X c^ C5 C3 rH CO - oi X l» 

^■H?l03 03 03 03 03C0C003 , 0 , Tt'i0i0C0TrtHXOXXX05wGrH 


o»,Hco-t oc0X03i0xr^rHH-05r^03C005 r^c0sCC0 
S-.^h.XO'fX-r-MOCOXCOOOliQClr-Hr^ 
cj, O CO 1^* X CO t" 03 l C t'* X CO C3 05 CO C5 O rt< lO CO H C5 iO 

= ® »'» ®p®’©"fc«§28§'of§’SStf2s S «’ 

C v-,_«r-<rOC5lHHt‘Tt'COCOt-TH*CCOCOOr-H'03 


*2 _ 

03 05 O 


r - co 03 CO iO ><0 O X 


CO 07 t- 
03 01 05 
r- IH 

x” 1 -f t-” 
cr cc in 

X 05 HH 


,-T H rH rH rH rH r-f 03 of 03 03 03 -X CO H* H« H H" ^ iC G t- X 


N^OOHCl-H'iOCONXCiOH'MMH-^COr-XOOH 

iO O CD CO C CD CD CO CO CO f'* T'* I- h* !'• h- I- I s * OC X 

xxccxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

<*-HrHrHrHr— rHr-rHrHi—rHrHrHr-ir-rHr-THrH 























































































No. 141 .—Nationality of the foreign tonnage, and total American tonnage, cleared from seaports of the United States for foreign countries, from 1857 to 1881 

inclusive. 


286 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 




c3 

O 


r d 

eh 

o 


5 H © © lO H W *-< ^ X X M X O O O X ^ H O h r' 

DO 7J CO 71 CO O CO CO CO 'X 00 CO 71 O O iC C lO 9 I- c 2 

^ CCl-' 71 71 1C X 71 W X r> X O CO lO lO v£ CD CJ 


c«HCOh*P-C5 , tfOC5000»H^^r^X^XC05XM^O.‘7 
gXCOt»OOO^NCOCOO--HCCHfOHiO’^Cl5CO^HOOi 
$00T^00C'l'^C4C0iMHrHiCC0»-<C005l>i0OC0C0C000<0 7'lt> 

^^ io" ^ Tt~rf Tt" to*ic ccT co co t> cc o' o o o r-Tco to *o 


S 


eh 

© 


co 

Co - 

o co 

Bn'* 


©tOiftOWNNOiOO^OOOH 
^^ICONC^OOCOiCOMOOi^ 
t' 7: rM' .*7 7J C7 L' O O 7! tO X 


i-i co 01 'X —■ -h 
NO ift ® tO 05 X Ol 
O n W M H rf 71 t' iO 


^ l(^ H w C ?1 O G O to 71 C5 ’t G rn r-CO CC r-' 05 

71 H O h CC C O H 71 h 71 O Cl r: C G *sC O W i- C5 t- I- CC 

h CO lO CO iC 7IC3 h O 71 C 17 O CC O OC O O O H O O 3 




o: CC CO 07 71 71 C^l r- ^ 71 71 ^1 C^l W 71 74 71 71 « W W W W CC CC 


u 

+1 *: 

o 




X 


tO 

CO 

co 


hicco:ihh^mox 

t^OCOOHftOt^fllOW 

XOr-XCCIOXMH 


O n t- O MO CD o o :: 
CCOrJ<Tf< t^tCJCOXO 
OOJ^rxOWC'tO’t 


CO CO 
tO 
05 Tt« 


«c 

<H X 

** 05 




t- 

—< to 

01 |> 

i—^ Hr^H rH rH ofoi oi co co co co CO- ’•*» »o to it- co co x © of of 


x 01 to co i>- co co o " o co oi 01 oi *—* o co 03 oj to to 

O O id CO CC l' ^ ID CC ^ X h W X Tf o N O ’t -t 

CO to L— to CO O co ^ »-h Ol ri CO X Ol — 05 O Ol X CO CO lO 


1 —\ £) 

<15 

o 


0 

bj) 


<0 

Eh 

.o 


'M^HC0005WOCOtOXMXCOHH^Ot.Oh*OM^tCf-i 
% H O Tt« h CD 71 W O X Ol X o ^ .*o X H ^ iD x 05 01 O W 'r t- 
^O’^tQO05T)'XO't‘0CCOX’^OL>*^c:C0CC'OC5C0l>05 


cP cTt>"cO* GO*o''^T od'^rH CO*cf co" CO - —TecTco"r-f O CO 05 05 x »o to 

Hc^h^h h H Cl CO 71 Ol Ol CD Ol 71 Ol rf lO M Oi- c: ^ 


H 07 
43 sc 
Eh <£ 

o d 

Oh be 


.OW^C505 U5t^O05C0HClNt^05HC05C0OC000C00iP- 
C0COtOXO5COCO<^tOO5XO5tO—i ^ O 05 X OCi O) O X H CO ^ 
£ 05 X to CO 05 H 05 CO i-i IT- X CO H tO r-i r-i tOjOl CO X CO CO H 

^ CO co" rf" co" -f co" t 


M' I.: h't O •< 71 M tc « X X Ol O O CO 
HHHHH»-Hhi71C171H 


SC 


. cc h cc ic ^ co t' o ci h i> it o o o: c o io 

cc r- CD O ‘O Ci x co IO -t O Ol 71 71 O 05 O 04 H 05 Ol CD t- »0 
^C0XC0W^W05^ffQC4HC0Nl0C0l0rt<CIOt0HHt>05<0 

c 2 o" to" o" o:" 05" o o co" x co o" r-T of co" co" xT CO —" to" x" CO of of of co" 

~ »—< r—I rl7U0HHHHHHHH710lHH01Dl ,, t l t ,, l> 


*9 


C005C0l0<0WC0HXC105C0Ht(5C5CC(M'»t'^04HO(M*005 
to X 05 O 71 CC to CO O C5 CO CD X H o N O H o 10 1- 05 CO O O C 
^ 05 X O CD CD if O tO CO CD 05 Tf 05 CO lO lO 71 71 O 1^ X -< 'C: 


05 " o" •**" of of r-T co" -o" —of 1 -H co" of to" Co" P-" 05" Tff —f o" o" *rj« co” of t> 

r^HHHriH(M7lHHHHr1nHCD , <l , t'«C0C0t'- l 05HCl 


0 

ct 


sc 


O O N 05 CO ^ ^ X 05 C; CO O CO ^ CO Tf 71 (71 O 17 C (71 X CO 
oC^W-t^^OJMMXMOXClOOifiWOXWhOOMO) 
gMQCO^MtOO^^l>OXOO«Ht}«HOtOClCOXlOC5tO 

pp r-T t>-" 1 -T Tjf o" t-O" o" -t" o" O'!" r-T to" r-T x" co" to" »o" o" co" o" CO "r-T o" t-" 

Oi HHH H 71 H H H H H W lO t> O l> t> CO O - 05 


PS 


P3 


bfc 

«—H 

<v 

Ph 


^^C005XC500X7I71t>C0^05H71COXNO^(X)ON 
to Cl H H CO 71 CO « X Ol O lO CO tO CMO H C H O H X Cl H 
-»Xt>XHCCXO505 71Xl>Tt<HCOXCO^^X^C0Tj'b«O5H 


«£ X rti Ol 

H rH 


r—I tO r—i 04 i“< 


CO to 


oicococo—« co oi <t -t* o o 

HH<X005MCOCOt- 
ii H 04 Ol 


£ 0 
d ca 

<i 5 


l>XH'iCOX03tCh.OCOiOH75tOCOlOt^*OH'071H , NlO 
y' H H CO lO CO t- CO CC !>• N O 71 H - Oi H 71 O C7 X N H iO 

CC CO CO Cl H tO H -H O. rf H ^ H H X lO »C 75 C5 tO Cl n 


H H Ol l' 


71 tO 71 H X C X X >0 H 05 71 CO 05 X >C Ol k 05 X 05 
riHCCTl i-H 71COH«OtOCOCC05HX 

HHH »—I 04 rH <04 rH 


CC 


0 

cS 


NOXXH^XOOHO05rJ<hXX^MONXOb*HO 
« t- CO 7HC 03 O X L- X -C O to CO H X t' CC H H CO CO H CC 
^01C3HXCDHXOH710 71^hM^Xh05i0^7JC5WM 


cP 00* GO of x" to" Ht" t—" co" to" Ol of 05 I o" o" O *rff o" of 05” Ol" X h-" —T r-T 
H CO t> to h h Ol 01 CO Ol CO X 05 X 05 05 Ol X 05 CO CO CO 




Ol 04 


© 

© 

Eh 

£ 


HtOHXCDOt^^7l03XOC3X71HOIOCOiCLOCCHO^ 
c;X'HOHiCHCCOCC05C0OC005XC0f^05U5C7t^X71t0C0 
^ 71 CD M O O X h P X CC O X O O X h G H 73 O h 05 


t °71t>HtOHX-'^05Xt'0(OOCOXCCtCXiOXMO^it 

bi CC H Ol 71 H H Ol CC H to t- 05 X 05 H 71 H CO O CC 71 H CO O 

H H p- h h Ol 71 71 Ol CC 


a 

c3 


,C0t»O05i7»Cr^OXC0C5CCr^l0t>H^05Q000t^C0CCO'^ 
coHD5t^HiCiOHi0 77CHX05C5COCCt^O. HXHt^XCOH 

H x ICIO Tf CO O tr: O'H^ to OQ lO »0 03 CC H H W 05 M Ol 


c3 

Hi 


c ?COC005 7U't^L-7rOC0 71'»tCC^CC0050CC^COC0 71^CC 

^ h H 71 CC H H Ol H 71 CC tC CC H tO O 05 tO W X X 05 05 71 H H 

H CC 71 OKC tO O CO CO 


o & v 

^.3 ^ 

^ biC^ 


COCCCCMXLCHOlCCOiClXXHHLOX-JOrt^t^COCOTl 
t X C ^ ID M H X CO X X « c: X Ol CD H O O. 05 CO O t- lO tc ic 
c 0 XCOt'H|>CCM^CCi.CXi07171M'NXiCiOO^XOH 


f *OOHCCH»Ot^CC75HH710 710NOOHOCC«ONO. HH 

/M hh Hi i*v^ Hi »h r/H rH *H> *H> \ _. »H\ r^ or <*h y^. >«.•» 


r-;0101C0'^C0<^t0C0C0t0C0l>O — tflCCOOCO^OiClOOCOO) 

CH HHH71C0*O^C0NXH71O 


0 

3 


t^HHC05 71CHC5C00 73XHH005 0 > . O CD h O 05 

,COP*n«OX05 05rrHHXOlCOHt>.COX7lX^H(0^tO) 
col>»Ot'L»iCO^t0 7lC5X^HX01iOCC05tCLCrrCCO^X 


<D 

O 


^OlCC01NH!OHOt>H05HH0 01N05050CCCC01CCO 
^ h Ol >C lO CC CC H* CC IC O iIC O — 05 CO X 71 l'* O Ol CO CC Ol CO Ol 
^ 71 71 Ol 01 Ol 71 CC CC 71 it ^ to O O Tf- x O 05 00 X wi O H H 


r0 

tn 


• rH 

Eh 

W 


o 


Cc 1—1 

Is 

«>i 05 


hXitOOtOCOXCJittOCOXCC'OHNOHHHXCCO 
XOOH7lHXCOCCH©D5t^OCOH03 0l4050H-C5 
Hl>Oh*C3HCOX0005CCCC«Ct>CCH71COCOHOt>tO 


°9d ; 5r' HCOri ^ 0 C^ , ^W7171CCtOrHr^NiOTtiOO> 

HXXt005r-05i0l>Xt^itt^itX»0C5^C0C0Hrtt'0» 

05O0lHHiCC505TtitCC(0t'*CC?0OCC0571' , t04NXH 


HHHHHHH7171710171CCCCititCOHittOCOt'*X 


<D 

c$ 

® ^ o 

<£ CO 

nd 
d 




X 05 O h Ol CC H to 'O N X 05 o H OJ CC H IC (O X 05 O n 

‘Q ‘O to co co X) o to co co co co o r- r- r- r-: r- 00 3 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxooxxxxxxxxxx 


































































No. 142 .—Tonnage of American and foreign vessels entered at the principal and other seaports of the United States from foreign countries, from 185.3 to 1881 

inclusive. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS 


287 


w>x 


<M n C 00 w H Tf t- o o ri t- N H o o: G O 05 >0 00 -<t 00 G t' 05 H 
CO5OMCOC4WCQO500 C; d X d 00 CO d XCOC5CC^t>OMCX^lo:C4^ 

to d" y5 -rf d oo*co* cTof r4 iff t-* to ado * —" rH* o rt<" of -rf of re" irf co o'x" ' oT 
lo Tf co ^ r: - o c a o ‘o m o i' co 05 ^ ci o Tf r- o w ^ io eo 
r-fOHTtOOMQOlOrlNrHXOWOOWCOt'WOHt'TflO^WO 


t rf rj. rj. ^ io ^ ^ w to ic ic c o o X o C5 w. o -i tr. lo 


•e^jod 

-U98 .IQlftO liy 


H in N X’t O 1.8 M H i.^ o ^ C t- H X 03 C; X N ^8 N ri O X G H 

,OXlOWO;-'ClHHOp^OOG^HCMHiOCOOJeOO(N^I^^X 
o s 0^i’tLO’^C5 0COC s ^©CJ^^COC5'MC5C.CCOt^^CQXOOMl^ 

£ t#T d" cf l- of i-T irf «<* —T <m" d" h t> r-T t-f co qo" <o" i-h oo" o" co" of oo" »o" d" *-T co" 

^ lO n 05 H o Tt ^ c CJ C5 H ^ N *t h iO rH Tf o n O C O 00 « H 

■i* i.o rf io »o >o io io lo r: ^ ,-o co co ^ tji ^ io c cj ri q h n C4 co io 


O M T'* M n UO CI »-i n X X n O O M lO M CO n l'* ^ X (M X O © C5 
• C4 1C ^ to M O O 05 X »0 M 05 M X C5 05 M X O ^ CO H 

^XCJJJW^l'-i^OCO^ClO^r-lX^L^OS^LO^r-iTfCQlOOlOO^ 

or>8 P IHJg w oo" d" oo" of t—" i-H irf m" r-T <c~ cf r-T oo" o" co ro" co" ro" co* cc" o" i-h" -** of ^t* ccf 

SHOON^^^NCCOMiOOClCC^H^CiiOM^iOWCliMClCCOO 

ddrHrH»-lrHddddddCOCOCO , <1<^rOCO^»r5iOt^Ot>COCCt'-X 


•U0J8GAp?f) 


•ea'eapo a&K 


OOCOOriCOOWX 05t-^>0i0^05i0XC0O^HOd^ 

• G ic O ^8 r-. iC. Cl -O Cl ^©OrtiOOQHOHMOOHO^H 

5 m t> CO 00 -10 X CO d d H O O iO O G O G O O CO O 1C OJ CO 


t'-" oo" o" t>f x" *** of* oo i-T of re" o" —T co" ro r-" —" x" of of iff pf irf 

H r—l 04 co • H H Cl Cl M O lO l> :J 05 X O CC r* H 


X'tCCI'OOXXCO X005050Clt^l^iCHtOOClCOC0050iO 

•t>M® 0X^X05 05 ttGC0ClHX^t05C05Tj-OXXOXr-M 

gX^XOClt'O.CCOi 05MI>ClX-tl>05l>6o»0^Ht^05X 

_o r-T of i-o" co" of co" of of oo 'iL' of cf oo* co" co r-T ad co" —" of o* of co" ad of o" co* 

h H C5 CO CO r- X iG ro O »C O cur. d X 1 C O O Cl CC 1C C O H lO o o 

iO rt- r O C lO ID ’O Cl Cl C5 CO ’i' LO LO uc CO Tf lO O O 05 


Cl H d 05 Cl O 05 O o C 55 Cl lO 05 CO Cl Ol Cl O to »H H 

oidro-toorooo^i H^^HTtd05coto»cict'iio^o 

XMXCiT+XCflOO id in (M cj ao rr. ri 03 r>. rr 25 r-< rf 


•oixqoi\[ 

05 cd oc cc io rH o t>-' * * * *go t> x i-h o co iff h- co x p- co a rH oi 

h x cc to o h rc cc to tc ^ x co o o i.c ^ x x ^ lo co x 

H H ri H H rH 

•quunuAUS 

WLOONlOOC^X® t^C-J®r)<Ofl«®l>®05a«)^®^ 

05 1.0 00 * rr !M Tf M O ® X t> rt o N tr * ® N t- ffl ao 

2hi>ooo s«;oo^^ 

_o dcoNo”xto to oi o »o 05 -<t h o ci 05 o r: »c a of of x ro a 

h io ic t}- t- o co x o h coroxxx^cocooixoooirox^H 

rH HrlHOlrlddCldHCl 

•uo^sapreqo 

jTo?is. 

94, 745 1 
89, 618 

88 , 833 
121, 542 
126,126 
126, 573 
129, 764 
126,411 

56, 371 
(*) 

(*) 

(*) 

(*) 

19, 113 
29, 077 
43, 790 
29, 691 
36, 332 
48, 104 
43, 576 
48, 040 

89, 424 
102, 023 
113,170 
140, 202 
121, 859 
160, 669 
116, 283 
156, 506 

•ajouipuBg; 

Tons. 
119,189 
156, 448 
165,127 
153, 323 1 
163, 381 
156, 810 
189, 992 
186,417 
225, lie 
123, 688 
128, 565 
102, 752 
88 , 466 
132, 836 
203, 618 
216, 727 
225, 302 
272, 290 
315, 734 
368, 136 
397,167 
558, 599 
561,314 
667, 857 
921,118 
951, 521 
, 374, 554 
., 502, 713 
., 365, 865 


•BiqdiQp'BXRcI 

Tons. 
183,914 
191, 673 
185, 975 
173, 178 
189,102 
156, 671 
180, 421 
185,162 
183, 408 
171,882 
194,443 
188, 938 
159, 579 
222, 952 
286, 735 
278, 440 
292, 595 
300, 006 
369, 616 
417, 911 
466, 817 
657, 045 
582, 295 
844, 294 
810, 633 
853, 027 
1, 315, 649 
1, 391, 312 
1,076,035 

•q.i 0 i Avajj 

Tons. 

1, 755, 521 

1, 840, 007 

1 1, 735, 907 

1,681,659 

2, 035, 649 
1,694,219 

, 1, 890,144 

1 1, 973, 812 

2, 320, 927 

2, 509, 749 
2, 554, 858 

2, 382,192 
2, 075, 477 

2, 697, 325 
2, 754, 005 

2, 865, 252 

3, 101, 691 

3, 093,186 

3, 413, 436 

3, 969, 339 
4,211, 624 
5, 049, 618 
4,421,074 

4, 467,139 
4,672,300 
5,545,026 
6,661,826 
7, 611, 282 
7, 506, 522 

acqsog; 

Tons. 
582,490 
653,443 
707,924 
682, 165 
714,821 
665, 442 
734, 167 
718, 587 
771,948 
619, 435 
639, 828 
681,189 
655, 035 
725, 424 
731, 930 
642, 478 
779, 371 
793,927 
836, 104 1 
881,486 
819,819 
730,769 
768,678 
, 637,738 

752, 391 
928,102 
1,137,632 
1,347,447 
1, 565, 926 

•paBUJOJ 

i 

Tons. 

62, 822 
43, 027 
67, 918 
53, 037 
69,146 
74, 921 
89, 876 
i 115,275 
135, 907 
143, 359 
138, 532 
149, 358 
i 134,447 
151, 625 
147,729 
170,641 
134, 805 
175,175 
161, 177 
173,427 
; 215,340 
213,351 
244, 565 
i 209,558 
, 184, 104 

133, 487 
109, 994 
122, 723 
157, 556 


<0 

r3 

a 

u 

c3 

05 

b* 


M^ICCNXO. O^ClCO^lOOr^X050H01CC^^tONX050H 
tC O lO to ‘O lO »c co to o o O O O O CO to t> 1- t- h- P- t'* ^ p* H x X 
xxxxooooooxxooaxooxxxxxaxxxxaxxxxx 


No reports were received from these ports during the civil war. 






























































































288 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


cd 

30 


•*?d 

'S 

SO 

5) 


b 


o' 


o 


Oi 


•ib;ox 


*u fn JO tO lO »“H CO —< Cl X X X C1 X O O S X T"”* O g* 

Soooi»NMC'inoMMMX««gogt'Oa“ 5 «g«ga 


t ?ST)'l0-hH(0M'a')'B3!OOO 

s oc oi co ® X m to w o o -t i' ffl o o 
_© Cl lO -rfi tO X Th 00 Cl ©I CO Cl —i ■— 1 lO 

^ TjTddddd din' d d d d dl® 1C Iffl CO CO CO t 


d d d d CC d co © S* CC' CO ec 1 C CO 

HHtOr- CCt-HlO'9 1 CCX'*t~^S8 
00i-IC08t>iO©C0CCC00CSdt- 


rod'o'aTcs o >-i co >c © 


•sjaod 

-B 9 S .ioqjo IlY 


•ooepnu.xx nB S 


•U0P9AJB*) 


eUB9|.X0 


^UO^^HMOuOCOiOXrfC-COtCa^Ot'OCWfflMCOt'HMO 

^wcaSexoffloxs^ooMtoiN^^ «h®icc l ~_ 

g jo'cTo ds' of o'—'id of o' x' co'co'id«©' co'cd d did o' of cf d idd t-'—; 

^§Sc§®«®§ 0 ?«KOK 5 iCiOtOtet'aoMr.MO -t-t®® 


mH.CNr-tO®COHt.«CSfflffllOX01C01«fflWfflainHO)Oa 

• § CC - "t ic B O Cl ic O O M 1- O X K C 1*. is w h Cl O O ~ X >■ ffi H 

t »OX'#'#t'0'#0!»»OOl>OOOiniOOU'OlOOOflOHlOM 


® of r-T of id of id d —T cc' id~ of id cio *t o o do 

d -f 0.1 OJ oooiiBiot-.^^o-ooooooio^! 


_ . O C N ICI' ^ X I' _ 

i Tf ic G O O 6 00 ri O H a CC C. 'O ^1 H 1.0 


O CO M CO •-* I s * X L'ti H 
1^ G LC O 't H MC 
2 Oi H 5D c: lO »C 

.O *vO 05 C O W G ^ G O 
H H H ri fO 7 H 


* * * * 


MNCOMHt^'^tXt'-CiCO^XCit'Oi 

c'l n « x o o c c x mo o. c: o ^ 

k (M ''t H |Q l> H O X lO OI C^l CO O CO 

, 00 * i—T cf co" tT cT cT cT oc r—~ ic co ci x cico 

H M O'! CO o o X ^ oi O O X Cl Ci X 


O »0 71 71 O CO 00 CO 1C 
(ML.OO^COCi'-tiCOCO 
' X t- ^ H LO CO W CO Oi 


07io xcocooxc»oh co-^ x co x r- lio Ci 

OC Oi CO H CO CO *iO Ol H X G i-0 O CO CO Oi 

COXL^Clr-c^TfXt^CiiOiCCO^iO'Ot^H 


£ o co" -* co" 00 " CO 00 *¥ o' T' ^J CO © — rH 71 t> CO X co O £- © S °S 

OMOoSciCOCO^LL^^^OOHttiMCOCLOlNCOOTfO^fO 
b CO *vO O I s * G S» X X CO CO rf ^ iO ?o 10 >-.o C iO 'O w -*r X o 


‘ a nq°w 


•qBUUBABg 


®»mxooot"t 

•00 05 — — — CC X S 


_©CCX©COS8SlO-'*< 

n ^ H M H 1-MM d 


--_o* 1- * * 


o^xuiWMCiaooTfioioxHo 
m Tf n oi x h o; -t* ® in I- ® — 00 t' 

.H('»*L' 0 't®ffla'#ci®iflneo 

d to' 05 ' cd s' o' d id cd co co s' s'd os' ed 
Cl !' O t' I' Cl >S IS 1 C It; C. a t-ic C X 


t'®’Ji®OOClH® 

,• m ci a m ci is ® — 10 
^wwmt'Xat'OH 

_© t-a 00 ' cd 1 - o' 00 00 of sf' 
^xoaxfixni'rt 


XHOwraaxfflaaMi'Ci-a-t 

■^O^^eMCl-^COrit'-COOLO 

. d cd —' -rf t'f «d 1—f •—r of id t~f of'd 0" cd o o 

iat'»owo'Cio«fflffl'+ffloi '0 
rH —I r-i' Oll^ — —I — — H Cl 


•no.iS 9 j.iBqo 


oiCHawaiooH^^xaaxci 

dLCxo-iwcioin't'OTf^rtt. 

t'05rtt>»lf3(N®®d®®Cl5HN® 


•gjorai'jjBa; 


•BiqdppBjiqd 


•q.iOi Ai9X 


ClW-tMCSt'iONl' 

^rtOOC-^OOt-CO^^^ 

0 —‘cdcf —r cd id r-f of cf * * cd cf of t-' cf -d to' id cf s' to' cd ido'x'-d 

tiCO(M' 5 j<tOrt , 'tCOC~lOs <N^-tM®l'!fl®0 — Cl O to t"t ® 


co , fOH®H®cxaii'i.t^a , ^'oaaoh*’^h*xo^ , xt.o® 

at'OH«H'woio»Mac»xcioa«»ci»i'®ciO't'>feii' 

^OCUftWN'Ti'OXXMClt'OlOClTfinXm'.X'COt'Xt'Of 

fi cd — od S ocf rd 1-T rd 00 co cf Td s' cf to' 'd d to’ -d s' r-f -d id id o' d id d o' 

Pies®®«®t't>ort'TCio^'t-o^Hcncx^o-tsio 

gHHr-HMHriHNHHHHrtHClNClClCOij'OCOXOCO'^CO 


lOOOSOXI>r~XSXXCliOSS-JSCOClSOlO'9 , SOX'9 < t- 

XOXmNh.®«WiCMM®-'HXHM'#H8WX®OSTr®in 

1 ;eHBt'0»ooc!j'*'t'Moxiooio®t'ti5rtM^ocoaoais 

S d cf cf of d s' o' id s' d dodcf cf id d d cf o' *d o' s' d s' cf id d o' d 

,OL'!i"tNi»rtCint'SO®'tCOO!St'XBOlCMCIMOOClit3 

tirtHHr-.Hr.HHHMClri!-lNClNN(N»lf^OO»XOININO 


SMifCO-<XaifliOi("#'t | iOiOCliOaT)'8»^XBt'l'!Mt'CI» 

ooioci'tst'oanoxHXSH«cin-Sr-Mhsm'foo 

l> JOCOt~S'J<8C10XOXXSXi*XOOOOCl©li»'CCl»COXXS 

S dod idcf s d tdoodddod cf 00 's' cf cd d cf cxf ddd cf cf cdds' cd 

PXS'fCllOSl't'XNlSMOOBltOMCtXK-XlOCOOClH 

SMMlO'J'IOt'^iCOH^iOKrHiOSt-OOClhOXWCl't'SiC'Clft 
d d d d d d d d cf cf Cl’ cf cf cf Cl cf ®f dl CC CO d d d d d »d s' d d 


nojsog; 


lOaiO'tM'Cmt'HOS.JIX'l'HXOraBH^ClBIflOitON® 
lOCCMOiOOCISOCIlOSS'ffflr- SCOOCll>-Ot~ — OClXOlO 
jj'f^xicoioo’tiosicciwiot'ssciioitsr'xoinfflcu's 

S cfcdddcdcf cf cds'ds cf ids'of iddo'cf o' ed s' cf d d d ud id id 

,Oa-»'t®HiiCCaM»SS««StNt'ClOOi()CI)t'OSNMH 

gins®ss®ssstt®®fflse®s®«t't'SS®t't>ON® 


e 

p 

§ 




CC 

T}< 


o 

to 


•paBJpOJ 


a 

Cj 


I'-r^OCliCiOS—'CCXXOXCl—irJiXdSXClXClSSSt-XO 

•oss^j'0^-ssccsoscisij , ccsxt~sxs-^ci — ta ss 

2-it>nei>«S»XWi|'OXC10S®b®®iOl'^9SHb.NH 

© d to' cd d d S o' id d d id 10 'd cf s' cf x' s' o' d s' o' o' cd s' cf d x' d 

ht'«0»0HMH5«St't'»l>aN0CI'"'ft'®IM»ll<0t'SH 
r-A p.HHWHf.Hr(rtHMCl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl CC d Cl Cl rH H Cl 


ctTinoffit.xsoHdM^ioct'xaoridTOitooi'xaori 

IOlOlOlOlOIOlOOCSSOSOStSSt'M't'M't' 1 'Nh.XX 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 


No returns were received from these ports during the civil war. 















































































No. 144 .—Tonnage of American and foreign vessels entered at seaports of the United States from the principal and other foreign countries, from 1857 to 1881. 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


® p p 

©So 

■3 

•r-i •'■h CZ 

-+-* re -Th ?-» 

•r a Jh a 

pqMpH'd 


5 w r w ^ ^ ^ o w co oo o t- © *o o ^ ^ C5 o 

COrt'OiMt'*C57a05^r-<COT-iC)COaOOt^QCCOO?OiOCOCC(M 


• OO CM C5 G5 O C$ C2 p* 
«H0*0 0Tj'N'i'«MTr 
^HnfHHHHnHn 

o 


lOPCOt^CCt-^CCp't^rHCOP'p'p'O 
O TT *s5 © -O X 00 X 73 »o *o X LO ^ 

HHHriHHrlHHCPMWC^CCCO 


P 

p 

•H 

^bJC 

*© 

PQ 


•C H vX LO w w G CO M 1C lO H C5 Cl O CO N CO fH IO »o 
c0’tc0i00it-^ecTtf0«De0t-rH^HC0C0(NOi0Mxt-00 
©OiHt>TtiC'OiOt>WriO^JOCCW7IOOOC'lC5t'-74CO 

2 °2 *2* «cTic pf 1 - o't>p ^cm of pTrn co cTof co co' r-Tcf oc'o'o iS 
S‘C^MC4C4iOTfH71'^^'^lC»OXCr^^^JLOCajTp710 
© HHWNNNN'^ 10 ^ 






••w 

43 


0 ^ 
o ® 

p 

33 a 

•3,2 

PQ 


© 

© 

p 

P 

i—> 

R 


H-^NLOX^O^-iOClXO^L^O^lXOMCOWCOCCS 
WH.'0XCCC*- < Ot-WOOO7Ji0 4rt'Cvn0XX-«C4O'^ 
C5HOri00HMClp*WC0^tHCO^7)C'.!NO7l7H0t'*N 

2 of o" icf cf r-T o' OC pf o' CO b-f jf I^T of cxf co" ocf rH" pf co" »o of co" P-" rH 
S!NoociC5c:c:at'rtriOMWrfir:»C'OHHC50ccio>o 

<D »"H HH HHHHrlHHf-lC'l^KNHWCOMW 


•p 

~bC 

a 


+3 

CO 


«c 

2 

43 

o 

SZ5 


OiOOOCaOUO'T^COOJOCC^OllOr-it^OlO 
Ol 01 CU»OSCOCOr^t>COHOOMCC050lCO 
1 —lOOmr-lOOOi-H^OOT-lOIrHOOO 


o o 
r "c 


000 c 

■a "C ^ ^ 


oworHXcoacoio^ocjCiO^OHX 
OHt'Ot'OhOHM^OOXHC'l'tCO 
rH H rH H rH Ol Ol CO CO CO CO 


t^OdOtXdCOCO^’ r-iH05OHC000HI>^00 05Ol0t-l0 

t- oi — co cc r-i co co 10 »o 00 01 01 p» co oc f-H 10 os t> 00 — r- rr co 

CiOOlr^iOlO^CrHCiOOCOOOOOOOlOJiiOO^rtCOOOO 


°o r^» 05 *—« co p* co 

£ CO »0 CO C5 f-l 00 
O CM CM CM <M CM CM 


COXX^OO’tOOCiiOCO'^OlCOHr-iCl 
OCif5t'{D^(OXH«tQOOTfC5fl5rHH 
r—I fHrHrHrHr-HrHOl Ol CO Ol P* lO iO O H O 


p 

& 

c 

rC 

X? 

© 

H* 

P 

tp 

© 

rP 

45 

o 

• *•4 
rH 
© 
Ph 


o 

43 

43 

p 

© 

a 

cr< 

0 ) 

CQ 

p> 

0 

cc 


o 

•F-H 

43 

0 

p 

f—H 
h3 

<1 

© 

r0 

43 

0 

o 

cc 

0 

o 

CC 

00 

© 

cc 

cc 

o 

to 

r0 

CC 


4. 

cq 

© 


43 

a 

rP 

4-* 

rP 

43 

• l—i 

* 

© 

0 

•f*H 

rP 

2 

o 

© 

CO 

• rH 

P 

• rH 

rO 

a 


o 

o 

pp 

CQ 


PQ 

*4H 

o 

© 

bJC 

p 

p 

p 

o 

43 

© 

rP 

43 

Tt« 

CD 

00 

tH 

n 

p 

© 

© 

rP 

43 

© 

43 

rH 

o 

•rH 

Sh 

pH 


'H «“ • rH 

0 p 2 

° !P P 


« O £ 

©CfcPQ 


p^ GO 
68 © M 
P p rt rH ^ 

t> (> *rH ^ ^ 

c o H c3 S 

£66 ^Ph £ s 


>•- 

p 

p 

a 

© 

o 


p 

rO 

o 


•d 

I a 

P bfi 
©.2 
pp bd 


o 

CO 

© 

p 

p 

d 

d 

© 

»d 

p 

© 

p 

© 


ClO4CCOC0 01C50l01CiXC0ONC5(MCHC5?0H‘CH0>0l0 
«0 10 X H ic Cl H CD X 71 4 H X O w Cl (M G CO CO X H O 
COOr-HXiOOJOOCOOCiOLOtOOlOOOXH-HlMHO 

. 1 -T rH r-f cf 1 -h" pf 4jf af co" pi" co" co" o' o' O o' OO" CO ^" 01 " CO o' O ©> 

590!OH<LCCOH-COt>^WOOCOCiCO«COI>CCt'-O-J CO 00 CO 

S; O C CO CD O CD O CO l> t' % l> O l> CD t'* f'* t'* l> CO LO CO CO iO CO C'* 


HH7HOCOLOCOOXOXl>XC3 0 . COmCOOCCO^COMH' 
OOIOIIOOCO — TtCHi0HC0OC04M'i0XClXH^t- 
■H X X Ol CO O O CC O t' O O W O 4 » Q rf LO h CO O X h CO 

Cc cf o" t-f 4jf cf o' co' t>" o" o" co" o' o" co" o" co' O r^T 1C cm' 00 " co' co" Tff 

SSOOaoOC5Xt>C5Hl-Wr.^WXH'00)»OH , W^O(M 

oCldHHH^THHHCOmTTiOiOrttOl^CJr'-t^XXOOiO 

£5 _r 


LOiOiCCl>COOlOI>OOCO^OClOCLCNCONXCOt-CO 
4 t- (N rr c O h r. h f 1 lO O X CO X 10 MO O O ^ O to X h 
CMCOHC^COOOCOCMOCOCCOCCCO*-H<MiOCOt4 0t4*OiOCM 

Co o" cf o" cm" r-T co" ic' CO 00 ' icf »o’ co" cf h 00 " o' co" rt' co" r-T co" of o" o" 
s 4 CQ (M O 4 MC O H X 4 X ® o CO X :j m »o O X CC 10 
O^^t'^O^^iCO^^XXXXCJOHHOOOHnH 


OH»OHM(MhXif5W©LOCOOH'CONH<«OOH'Hfl50 

X O ic 1C t- H X l: eti C5 X 1C O C5 H Cl 4 O O O W CO h Tf H 
COCOCMOH^COOL-^OOnCOrtTrt'-OOOO^COCOXH 

r-T co" r^*' o" cf 00 ' of co" co' of rn" r-T co" T*f of CO co" 4jf Tjf »o' co" of »cf o' o' 

HWCOOTfrfH'ttOClOOC^CQQOXHHOCIXC'ICO 
lCC'lH’^Tf^iOcOOOOXOHL'OHXTlXCiaJOM't 
. -rC> 

^4 r—> r-H t— rH •—i rH ri rH rH rH rH CM CM CO CO CO CO CO tT pi lO CO CO 

rO rO O -O rO fO rd rO 


. . .... 

NXOOHClCOH'lOOt'*XC50H7lf0^lCCh'XQOH 

i*o 10 »o co co co o co co co co co co r— 1'* t-^ r^» r— in 00 cc 

OCDOCOOCOOCOCOCOCCOOCCCXDCOOOOOOOCOOOQOOOCOCOCOGOQO 


067 


19 


289 


♦ 


separare column. 

b A small portion of the tonnage from the United Kingdom during these years entered at lake ports, and has been deducted from the total tonnage entered from that 
country, which will account for the apparent discrepancy between these figures and those of the regular annual statements of navigation. 

c No detailed statement of the trade of each port with foreign countries was published for these years, which renders it impossible to determine what amount of the tonnage 
of each foreign country, if any, may have entered at lake ports. The whole amount of tonnage from the countries herein enumerated has therefore been credited to seaports. 























































































































of American and foreign vessels entered, tfc. —Continued. 


290 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


I 

I 


Total. 

Tons. 

4, 842, 927 
4, 338, 233 

4, 913, 031 

5, 000,194 
4, 550, 087 
4,191, 296 

4, 205,420 
4 167,481 
3, 826, 927 

5, 008, 487 
5, 266, 386 

5, 571, 521 

6, 031, 980 
6, 270,189 

6, 994,197 

7, 769, 986 

8, 394, 749 

10, 009, 655 

9,143,138 

9,715, 904 

lo, 406, 488 

11,530,527 

13, 768, 137 

15, 251, 329 

15, 630, 541 

All otlief 
countries. 

Tom. 

793, 692 
684, 078 
744,125 
717, 456 
700, 855 
442, 439 
489, 095 
464, 642 
485, 272 
561, 292 

1 634,290 

664, 221 
647, 736 
764, 571 
j * 932, 781 
! 950,556 

! 1,067,783 

I 1, 049, 952 
1,143,105 
1, 037, 892 
1,007,836 
i 1,127, 894 
1, 448, 304 
1, 782, 474 
1, 840, 788 

Mexico. 

.llilgl§Il!l!2HISSIIll!il 

British Pos¬ 
sessions in 
Australasia. 

SHSISiSSIKMSaiggSBKS 

I »; 3 a S 3 3 S 3; S' 8 2 S3 S' S' Si C 2 gggfg§S 

Spain. 


£ 

Tons. 

30, 867 
33, 288 
35, 892 
32,451 
38, 027 
33, 492 
30,431 
19,124 
9, 761 
26, 308 
21, 597 
20, 510 
24,107 
27,112 
28, 319 
51, 545 
69, 906 
162, 647 
128, 971 
152, 901 

179, 386 

180, 032 
275, 437 
250, 998 
277, 245 

China, in¬ 
cluding 
Hong-Kong. 

.8E8S8S3ii9SS28S8SgSiilS3S 

1 tf s' s s s' s' £ i a i s' & s" s' a s s' s' S % % g g s' § 

United States 

1 of Colombia. 

iigisiiiiiiiiiisaiisisiig 

1 








































































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


291 


CO 

00 


o 

•N 

od 


8 

8 


8 

•<s» 

*N 


no 


- 

£ 


Ss 

<K> 

SO 

•Si 

•Si 

$ 


SI 
00 
05 S 

•Si 

. 8 
v* 

e> 

00 r ~* 
^ 00 
*T oo 

C _J 

8- 

00 

oo 

8 

<**» 

O 

£> 


00 

NO 

00 

Oo 

oo 

00 


•<-w. 

# 

£> 

ni 
—- 

<$ 


*ni 

. 

<fc> 

8 


<£> 


00 ri 
<X> r^ • 

• cc go 
rd'd’rt c« 
® fl.H H 

•BhS 3 
•tn pq 

ri 

w^s 


§w 


CO ° O CO «J^ rH JD CO U-: l> to 05 'M CO t- 05 lO :#-* O CO CO CO 

S2 ^ S ° "^ 1:0 ° H C ' 1 ° ^ 05 ^ ^ C5 O lO H 05 05 00 H r. ^ 

CC , tO^^)CCH!MC0^7lTt'HC}^^JOlf5CJOOOCJ05Xt^C5 


Co 

8 

£ 


oo 


^S t ^ c 5 C ^ a5 ^ Dco ^^' lT ^'^ l ^^ , X)l>OCCCCiiC 

^tOI>lf5WWCOlOT}i^iOiOCO^iOO'.Ot^J5H 

HHriHHHHHHHHHHHHHHrlr-W 


O »0 »C CD 
Ol Tf oo oo 


a 

u 

"3 

n 


rji N lO O a ?1 CC f- •t 05 M X ?: CO O X ^ CJ ^ M O '>0 lO c 
WHOn^?o^coTt«eooNi>C'i©HHCOt-{OHOOi?o©o 
C0Q^O«0OC0C0?0Q10I>X03^'^C0 *>DtM>I>C0^C0'^40 


^ »o io x o t> oo lo m ^ o -h co ri Oi o h-" io m w 

gCOl^COCOCOCOlO^COCOiOOOOOaOOOC'l 

T—1 


co 

•t X "M UO I- rf CO O 


"3 


•t’tC3CC'lWr^’tOC'CTfrfHl.‘:tOO^CCOX>XOC500 
'O r-1 X C5 c; CO Ci »0 iO H 00 CO >0 05 1C •t t^ O CCIO X X H 

cocQoo^o^wooowoo^o^^WHaojaw^oowoH 


5C Ci W C O 30 « » 
SiOlCOCO^^ClrH 
.6 


O^I-OCOXN®»ft«HhOX’1'©OiHO 

r<WNffOCO^Tj(Tjofl»f5CtNlNXfl5WM , tW 

*"H Hr'C'JrH 


r^.5 

ac jz< 

•l~» ^ 

.■s a 

w| 

o 


*d. 

~ • • • f • • 'H^COH^lOOO^WCJiOX^OiOOOSt-^ 

oXj • • • 3 • • 

a • • • • • • »CQ?P0i05^iCHC0H0COt>05^0JL0O05 

.. .FH.. • - - 

®o -M.M^O^HCiMOiONOCOCDWCONCO^ 

g 00 .05M00C005OO(M^^L^OC5H10NtJiW 

C>^3q0^qqqq r-1 HHnHriHlM(MCOWCO.*OCO 

o ; 


£ 


a> 

o 

§ 

& 


OONt-OlOHHCOXC5fl50COO^X^HrJiTi1WH05Tt<<0 
WOWl>CCOOOOOCO(MHCO|>OTt<OOOOlOl>t'NiOWOO'^ 
kflXOO>^XOW©OOOOt»t'^WQOWCOHOOe 0000 50 6 

00 IH o aT oo" O'sf 00 lO C4 *-f -rf 00 l> of h-" CO* oT tff CO CO r*T CO CO t> Co" 
giO^MC700^05COaO'tHOl>35-XfflHnH*0^»OW 
© CO 04 04 CO £^4 04 04 04 04 04 04 rH 04 04 CO CO t* »0 CO ^ »0 CO 

£x _r_r_r 


•J 

8 B 

g £.2.2^ 

o ^ fe Jr ^ 


00OC0C004OO04^C0C0C3 04Ci00C0C0rHr^O04t0t0O04 04 
r- CO CO O © rf Ol 04 04 05 04 CO 04 CO CO CO tO T lO t*i t* h~ CO 

tf50U^JiC4^«®C5000iOOOOCOOJCCOt'COOOWW't04 

°d co"n-Tt>Tt>T ,-h oc" r-"co"o"cTr-Tr-Tof o~oTco"of cc to aTco"oo" aT 

£C&aOHGOOO-*a0 04 00404iOCOOCOiOOOCOO'»+OiiOGOrH 
o I> i- t> cc 00 X CO CO CO O. O. O O 00 Ci C5 oo l> O CO to to 00 


a 

cS 

a 

<© 

o 


(M^^COHCOCO^OOSOO^HOOOCO^rNNHtNHtOOOn 

h N Ol H c r-05 00 0400CC050t^^04^COC4X0050f-i 

00 'O O Ol a Ol 04 »C M 04 O t> iHCOOCHNt'HNO^^ 

05 ■to irf CO" CO" ^ rtT aT oo" rf" Co" o" l o" of Th" to" r-T O o" to" of Co" oo" Tf" co" to" to" 
StOt>COHOt^tOtOCOOSOCOCOiOC4rfCOCit> 0.0 n^OXn 
OHr^HtMOlHnHpiTSCOCO^lOOtOtOXOOOOOOJOriHCO 
Lu pO - r - 


c® 

C5 


CJ^OCOt-'-OCOOO^’O’tOOCOCCO^OXCOOHNNO 
tOCOTTCOOT^l^COCOtOCOCOCOOOCO — lOCCCJMOHrjftOOCC 
C0t004T#iOt>t>i0C3^C0I^-0504l>0Jr-l00t000t0»0Tt*O00t0 

co of " o to" oo" to" to" co" to" of o" oo td Tjf to" oo t^-" cf of of of r> co" oo" of 

gHOCOCOClOOOaOHOOiOt'riCiO^Orf'OXOHQTli 

OtOCOtOCOCOtO'^^^tOCOtOt'-COt^sOOCOOOOOCOtOCOt^COt^ 


^ . 
^a 

• H aZ 

P fcX) 

fl 

— »rN 



Co 04 C3 CO O CO r- to H CO 00 

g CO 04 H CO to O Oi O to C 

o O ’t CO Ol to to t O Ol X CO 00 C5 X Ol 00 O l> to H 00 O X H O T)1 


tOrt'CCTtCiCSOTj'r-1 lO rf CO h* O 
lOOOO^OOtOOCOCOCSOCCO 




nH»-iT-»»-i04 04COCO^^Tt'iOtOCOlr-b- 




iO 

-Tf 


o 

^5 


o 

CO 

<v 

a 

C3 

<p 

'd 

a> 

n* 

d 


COtNOOOOHWM^tftCOf-XOOHNM^lOCOt-XOJOH 

iOtototococococococococococot^t>*i s ^r-t'-i>t^t^£-r^ccco 

ooo6x.ooooooooooooooooocooooooooooxooooocooccoooo^ 


a Prior to the year 1864 the tonnage of British Columbia is combined with that of the British Possessions on the Atlantic. 

b A small portion of the tonnage from these countries for these years entered at lake ports, and has been deducted from the total tonnage entered from that country, which 
will account for the apparent discrepancy between these figures and those of the regular annual statements of navigation. 






















































































































No. 145 .—Tonnage of American and foreign vessels cleared, <fc. —Concluded, 


292 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


t>O^OffllOH^®HNOOHQO»N®OOaOOJHO£.fc 

o©aoc-icoojco®cococooococoO'i®»ot'*if5®>«©tj©®cg 

ooc©eO''j , cot»®oio4kfOooTj'©ico®ootr-oo©®''Oifti©©©© 

. mm to t>" t-" ®" M co" ®" ©" ®" ®" rH m r£ t>“ oo* *t of ®" of oo" co <c iff co" 

55 ©oococ©uo©®Mt>.{O{0©.H.-i<o.HeOrHiO-3;cpop'j<r-© ® 

S«ooo^c©o*^'©ieooii-iT-iifsoo>-ioo©L— ‘ftoosoococccoc'it- 
^ rf'TfTjr-^'^riffift'io'to «r © t-' oo'®"®"®"®" -f co" jfifjef 


'.n w* .1 ^ -i w i t—' 4 I.'- *—i ^ * • . • —» >• *- »- - » - «- - *~r 

<0i0^HC0^C0C0«0i0i0Hb*iCHWMO03iOt''«0H'^00O 


oo OO O H N < 

SS ^ co -h ^ a 
0^00(0 0 11 

^ r-T 


^«DO®iftinO«Ol>^fl50505fl>«OOHWM 



40 (M 
CO t" 
<M O 


^40 

£ 


0 »»HOI©«OOOIrt®©®UOOOaO©IO«.-lt~-eO®©COCO« 0 ®© 
tH®C-O}00iO©r-®00®i-Or-i — ®®!OlM(Oin<NC't'®t' 
©t-©COaO©tH©©aOOJ©t-i-l®i«Wr-iM'''i<COCOM©© 

sncTn oc" im" ®" oo »rf of ©" t-f ®" ®" to to i-T -r" ®" ®" ©" no" oo co 
ooo®ooeo.»ao©eoooaot>ao®®<ouo«©oooot-©©©4<o 


t-00®ift®»rtMMt~0<l©«O'H<M00®MMCOMlO00Hi>C0r 


gr*iCit>®iftcoMM''i<wi>.ioco-**'*c<oa« 
£ 


W) 

bCS 

ef.S © 
O-oM 
as ,3 wo 
o © a 

•2m 

W 


S.S 

«§.© 


co 


a 


•g'S 

.•go 
J3--4H 
b © 


Q600^00C505HlC^?DHC4^0>OOOiftO05«000«0C10J(N(N 
^05HHCiC-'tC1^40^^C0t'00 00OOnn0:HC0«00O0> 
O rH rH rH r—I pI HHnHNH 


^OCD^^OOiHHMCDUjHIO^CClOOO^lOHOOHlOH 

MOO^^r}<W^t>HO^^OO^iNiO’f^WOON4ftXiOOH 

W«0l>00t^dWO4ftHI>H00-^OWW^ 


$^O^40 40 40^C0C0C^C^lC0^f^40< 


OWbiON(NWOJO^OOON^050(N^CONOOH^iOH 
^OCOt^iHHMQOTtXW^QOHCJOOOWOJ^HH^X 

2 •*" ®" oo" —<" hjT oo"oo" ®"c-" io i-T®" —®"-«o of of ®"oc" co uo ooof tn ®" —" 

g®®®®OOTj*®t-®t'-lOlOlOlO'^'C<IOC05(MMeO-^iO^®OOOJ 

„© M rl rH rH 


©o»®oioo©«©'Heioao®i>.®®'H<'*t~aos<ioq>©®®®oc® 

C0l0iHlflOMt0MH<'M0100I>©OaC0^(Nl00000©X«© 

0 Cl 0 ®r*«©rJ<^rHi-(®®t^© 01 ®e<J© 0 Jr#- 0 at-r-lt-l 0 O© 




© oo 

t- ® 

—I 00 


t>OCrHCOrHtO©®®t'.COUOCOM®©©OOCO©t~©t-CO 
CO CO 00 —I ® OOC©©inuOCOi-<rti-0©©T)<OJlO©®CCCO 
0»MOOrHUO®OOOC«Ot>rft>OOCO'^<C-1©rHUOrHO)rJ>00-"3< 


«g C~ t- ® 50 of r* ®" M 00 Of ®" Of t>" <®"of M" ®" rH*tH .fV Iff Iff 00 1- 
gt'00®H05t'ffl®«®t'00t'(»a0!MHHH>-iOCK6int 


a 

J3 

l-S 


Sf>r 0 S9;Sna e y c, 5 r*' lft ®'> Q o« l *' H ^coHj«>o®c-oo©©rH 

aoooaoooaoooooooooooaoooooooaoocooocc^ocooocacocaoao 


go 

52 
£ «S 
^ b£ 


© a 

3©. 
rrz © 


© 


00 


rs . 
a © 

% a 


C? 


a J 

05 <S 

la 

3.3 
3d 8 

J 2 © 

-HI 2 

ct c^_ 

M © 

Si 

© O 
j, 'O 

a 3 

© a 
>0* 


© 


.2 £ 
3 a 

be 

Hi *0 

<© © 
^ ® 


p © 

© © 

I§ 
* 8 
© g* 

b£H 

II 

11 

M 3. 

© a. 
a « 

o © 


as 

® o 


























































AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 

( mounts paid by Great Britain for ocean mail service since 1857. 


293 


1857. 


1869 

1858. 


1870 

1859. 


1871 

1860. 


1872 

1861. 


1873 

1862. 


1874 

1863. 837 

1875 

1864. 


1876 

1865. 


1877 

1866. 


1878 

1867. 


1879 

1868. 


1880. 


From the report of the British postmaster-general. 

J. N. WHITNEY, 


Treasury Department, Bureau of Statistics, 

November 11, 1882. 


Acting Chief of Bureau. 


Answers of United States Consul Packard , of Liverpool, to interrogatories. 

Question 1. What was England’s tonnage in 1881 in her coastwise and river trade, 
and also in her foreign carrying trade ? 

Answer: 

HOME TRADE. 



Vessels. 

Tonnage. 

Men and 
boys. 

Sailing . 

10, 269 
1, 377 

676, 792 
239, 488 

34, 623 
14, 409 

Steam".. 

Total. 

11, 646 

916, 280 

49, 032 



PARTLY HOME AND PARTLY FOREIGN. 


Sailing. 

791 

165 

106, 870 
63, 519 

Steam. 

Total. 

956 

170, 389 



FOREIGN TRADE. 


Sailing. 

4,163 
2, 546 

2, 785, 506 
2, 618, 778 

63, 797 
73, 404 

Steam....... 

Total. 

6 , 709 

5, 404, 284 

137, 201 

Total sailing... 

15, 223 
4, 088 

3, 569,168 
2, 921, 785 

102, 498 
90, 405 

Total steam . 

• 

Grand total ....... 

19, 311 

6 , 490, 953 

192, 903 



The above table includes river steamers. Am notable to ascertain the number and 
tonnage of the river traffic. 

Question 2. What was the tonnage of British vessels built in 1881, first, for the 
coastwise and the river trade, and, secondly, for the foreign trade? What the ton¬ 
nage of sailing vessels, and what of steamers engaged in the foreign trade ? 

Answer. Three hundred and fifty-nine sailing vessels, of 92,420 tons; 486 steam ves¬ 
sels, of 408,764 tons. Total, 845 vessels, of 501,184 tons. No distinction made be¬ 
tween the coastwise and river trade and the foreign trade. 

Question 3. What tonnage tax, dues, and duties does England impose on her mer¬ 
chant marine engaged in the foreign carrying trade ? 

Answer. The government only imposes an income tax. The tonnage tax, dues, 
&c., are local. Tonnage tax is is. 5 d. per ton. Pilotage is 9 s. per foot draft. 






































































294 


AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


Question 4. Wliat is the average cost per ton of iron sailing vessels and also of iron 
steamships at the present time ? 

Answer. Sailing vessels from £17 per ton for small, from £13 per ton for large; 
steam vessels £14 per ton dead weight capacity; steam vessels for passenger purposes 
vary, according to style and accommodation, from £20 to £40 per ton registered ton¬ 
nage. # . ... . 

Question 5. What is the cost per pound, or otherwise, of iron-shipbuilding material? 

Answer. The average price of iron for shipbuilding purposes is about £8 10s. per 
ton (of 20 cwt.), and timber, say Quebec pine, 2s. 6 d., aud East Indian teak, 7s. 6 d. 
per foot. 

Question 6 . What are the wages paid various classes of shipwrights? 

Auswer. Shipbuilding labor, unskilled, 3s. to 4s. per day; skilled, 7s. per day. 

Question 7. What is the taxation imposed upon property invested in vessels, or the 
income thereof? 

Answer. Fivepence on the pound of net income, and six per cent, per annum is 
deducted for depreciation. 

Question 8 . Wliat wages are paid seamen on English vessels ? 

Answer. According to voyage. The present rate to New York is as follows, viz: 

Per month. 


First, mate. £^ 0 

Second mate. 6 0 

Third mate.... 4 10 

Seamen... 2 10 

Ordinary seamen. 1 10 


See copy dispatch, pages 5 and 6 , for rate of wages on steamers, &c. 

Question 9. What proportion of seamen on English vessels are natives ? 

Answer. Cannot ascertain. [The London Times says only twenty per cent.] 

Question 10. What are the provisions of the English law respecting advance wages 
to seamen on shipment and respecting extra wages to seamen when discharged in a 
foreign port? 

Answer. It is now illegal to give seamen advance notes. (See “Merchant’s Shipping 
Acts,” page 289.) No extra wages are exacted when seamen are discharged in a for¬ 
eign port. (See Shipping Act, page 94, &c.) 

Question 11. On what imported supplies for vessels is a drawback of duty allowed? 

Answer. Ship stores are put on board ships free of duty. When dutiable stores are 
returned they are locked up by customs authorities on board ship, but given out to 
captain, as required, for consumption on board ship. Stores remain under customs 
seal until the ship again sails. There is no drawback of duty. 

Question 12. Hoes the English Government pay the expenses of hospitals for seamen, 
or is any tax imposed upon seamen or owners of vessels fot the support of such hospi¬ 
tals ? It so, what tax ? 

Auswer. No tax is collected from seamen or ship-owners for hospitals. The hospitals 
are supported by government and by voluntary contributions, to which ship-owners 
contribute largely. 

Question 13. What are the fees charged for measurement of vessels and papers fur¬ 
nished the same ? 

Answer. See Shipping Act, page 168. 

Question 14. What are the duties of the Board of Trade with reference to the English 
foreign commerce and carrying trade ? 

Answer. See Shipping Act, page 5. 

Question 15. What are the light and port charges on vessels entering British ports? 

Auswer. Light dues vary according to voyage—sixpence per ton aud upwards. For 
port charges of this port see Tables of Rates and Dues. 

Question 16. What per cent, of protit on the value of the vessels do English ship¬ 
owners generally realize on vessels engaged in the foreign carrying trade ? 

Answer. The percentage of profits varies much, according to voyage, cargo, and special 
charters, &c., but generally a British ship-owner is satisfied with 4 to 8 per cent. net. 

Question 17. What did England pay in 188l-’82 for mail service on ocean steam¬ 
ships ? 

Answer. For amount paid, see Postmaster-General’s Report, page 24, as follows: 


Brazil, River Plate, and Chili . $56,690 

Cyprus aud Alexandria. 37 470 

East Indies and China.«. 1,790 000 

East coast of Africa... 50 000 

France....79* 000 

Malta. 10,000 

United States. 373 o(jq 

Halifax and Bermuda. 87,500 















AMERICAN SHIPPING INTERESTS. 


295 


Panama to Valparaiso. $14,740 

West Indies. 406,811 

Mexico. 4,840 

Other points. 52,810 


Total. . 2,963,521 


N. B.—The report states that in 1881-82 England paid to her steampships for mail 
service $1,641,300 more than she received in postage from mail matter transported by 
them. The amount of mail pay and consequent bounty from the treasury have been 
decreased from year to year, as the lines have become firmly established. In 1880-81 
this mail pay was $3,708,618, and in 1871 over five millions. 




























































INDEX TO APPENDIX. 


A. 


Page. 

Angle iron used by John Roach & Son. 87 

Argument of John Roach. 88-102 


B. 


Bigelow, E. D., statement of. 27-29 

Board of Trade of San Francisco, memorial of. 262 

British mail contracts, synopsis of. 226-230 

Burtt, J. Edward, statement of. 15,16 


C. 


Calkins, Hon. H. C., statement of. 75-77 

Candage, R. G. F., statement of. 257 

Carrying trade, foreign value of, from 1840 to 1882. 275 

Codman, Capt. John, statement of. 35-44 

Contracts between Great Britain andCunard Line. 163-168 

Inman Line.159-162,169,186 

National Steamship Company. 188 

North German Lloyd Line, of Bremen.. 155-158 

Pacific Steam Navigation Company_ 136-141 

Peninsular and Oriental Steam Naviga¬ 
tion Company. 142-154 

Royal Mail Steam Packet Company- 116-125, 

207-225 

mail. 103-230 

synopsis of English. 226-230 

to French companies. 103-113 

Crump, William, &. Sons, vessels built by. 85 

Cunard line, British mail contracts with. 163-168 


D. 


Daly, Capt. Michael J., statement of. 73-75 

Duncan, Capt. C. C., statement of. 53-61 

E. 

Elwell, Charles F., statement of. 2-6 

English steamship rates for government passengers. 131-146 


F. 

Fees paid United States by Pacific Mail Steamship Company 

Ferris, James J., statement of.. 

Findley, M. Field, statement of. 

Foreign carrying trade, value of, from 1840 to 1882. 

Tonnage. 

France, laws of, on shipping. 


239-241 

268 

259 

07 r. 

285,286 
225 


G. 


Goss, G. C., statement of. ,. 

Great Britain, amounts paid by, for ocean mail service 
Tonnage of. 

007-—20 


15,18-23 
293 
82 


297 



































298 


INDEX. 


H. 

Page. 

Hamilton, Dr. John B., statement of. 65-73 

Harlan & Hollingsworth Company, vessels built by. 84 

Hincken, Edward, statement of.-. 24 ( J 

Hopkins, C. F., statement of. 262 

Houghton, F. W., statement of. 2-6 

Houston, J. B., statement of. 236-246 

I. 

Industries of the United States and Great Britain.. 82 

Inman line of steamers, British mail contract with.159-162,169,186 

Iron, angle, used by John Roach & Son. 88 

K. 

Kelley, Lieut. J. D. J., statement of. 246 

Kimball, Jno. H., statement of.23-27,33 

L. 

Lauterbach, Edward, statement of. 236-246 

Laws of France on shipping.. 225 

Letter of John Roach. 113 

Lord, Robert W., statement of. 56 

M. 

McKay, Nathaniel, statement of. 266 

Mail, British contracts. 226-230 

contracts. 103-230 

steamers, United States passages from Cork to New York. 187 

West India and Brazilian... 207 

Manufacturing industries of the United States and Great Britain. 82 

Marine, merchant, of the United States from 1789 to 1881. 278-280 

Maritime Association of New York, memorial of. 2-6 

Exchange of Philadelphia, views of.•.• 30, 33 

Memorial of Maritime Association, New York. 2-6 

Merchandise, value of, imported and exported from 1835 to 1882. 274 

Merchant marine of the United States from 1789 to 1881. 278-280 

N. 

Nationality of foreign tonnage. 285,286 

National Steamship Company, British mail contract with. 188 

Nelson, William, statement of. 61-64 

Norcross, Jas. W., statement of. 253-257 

North German Lloyd Steamship Company, British mail contract with. 155-158 

O. 

Ocean mail service of Great Britain, amounts paid for. 293 

Osborn, Capt. B. S., statement of. 35,52 

P. 

Pacific Mail Steamship Company, statement of. 236-246 

fees paid United States by. 239-241 

receipts from United States Government .. 245 

Pacific Steam Navigation Company, British mail contract with. 136-141 

Packard, United States consul at Liverpool, answers of. 293 

Parker, Capt. James, statement of. 45-50 

Passages United States mail steamers between Cork and New York. 187 

Patten, Jarvis, statement of. 11-14 

Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, British mail contract 

with. 142-154 

Philadelphia Maritime Exchange, views of. 30-33 

Plates, ship, used by John Roach & Son. 87 

Potts, Joseph D., statement of. 29 














































INDEX. 


299 


Q. 


Queries of the committee 


Page. 

1 


R. 


\ 

Rates, English steamship, for government passengers. 131-136 

Receipts for transportation of mails by Pacific Mail Steamship Company_ 245 

Ren wick, E. S., letter of..'.. 251 

Resolution constituting committee. 1 

Roach, John, argument of. 88-102 

letter of.;. 113 

statement of. 7*7-230 

vessels built by. 83 

Rogers, William, statement of.6-9,34,51 

Royal Mail Steam Packet Company, British mail contracts with.116-125,207-225 

S. 

San Francisco Board of Trade, memorial of. 262 

Sew all, Arthur, statement of. 10,11 

Shipping law of France.. ... 225 

Ship-plates used by John Roach & Son. 87 

Spooner, Nathaniel, statement of. 260 

Steamships, rates for government passengers in English. 131-136 

Synopsis of British mail contracts. 226-230 


T. 

Thebaud, Eugene, statement of. 267 

Thoms, Dr. William F., statement of. 230-236 

Tonnage of vessels, American and foreign. 287-292 

built in United States from 1868 to 1880 . 80 

built in United States from 1805 to 1&81. 281 

cleared from 1864 to 1882 . 273 

entering American ports from 1840 to 1882. 271 

employed in the foreign carrying trade from 1836 to 1881. 277 

foreign, entering and clearing in United States. 285,286 

of Great Britain from 1854 to 1881. 82 

in foreign trade. 283 

the world. HI 

Trade, value of foreign carrying, from 1840 to 1882. 275 


U. 


United States Consul Packard, of Liverpool, answers of. 293 

mail steamers, passages Cork to New York. 187 


Y. 


Value of merchandise imported and exported from 1835 to 1882 . ^ 274 

Vessels, tonnage of, American and foreign. 287-292 

built by Cramp, William & Sons. 85 

Harlan & Hollingsworth Company. 84 

Roach, John & Son. 83 

in United States from 1868 to 1880. 80 

1805 to 1881 . 281 

1840 to 1882. 284 

cleared from 1864 to 1882. 27 

entered American ports form 1840 to 1882 . 271 

employed in the foreign carrying trade from 1836 to 1881. ^ 277 

foreign, entered and cleared iu United States. 285,286 

Great Britain, from 1854 to 1881. 82 

Great Britain in foreign trade. 283 

world. 275 


W. 

Wages, rates of, paid on the Clyde. 

by John Roach & Son . 

Welsh, Henry D., statement of. 

West India and Brazil mails, British contract for 
Whitmore, Parker M., statement of. 


86 

86,87 

15 

207 

16-18 


o 
































































































































































' 































































. 






■ 







































































































' 

































































. 


















* 

































































v yj u 


• 

> 

i % 

k 

g* 

Sf 

% 

%■ 


£j 5L . 
•>15 • 
»oX 

;>j> 

■>45 

->S 

>3> 

5> 

0> 

>’ 

|T 

1 

g' 

m 

( k 

» y> 

^ ■> 
IS •; 

a > 

1* 

S 

> J> , 

9 ^> ;■• 

»3> 

»!> . 

i 

> y> 

KS? ; : 

» X> 

,* 3> 
?' 2 > 
£» i> 

» s> 

s» v> 

3> 

3> 
l> 

3> 

3> 

3 

^> 

2 ) 

> 

D 
2> 


■$ 3 J % > ' > 'V; 

. ?.>:>> S • 

f■ <■ j. 

.\/ •>>*» , 

y : •> • ■» > 

i l ■ >>» ... 

S ? 1 > !)> ) , 

, _,> >> •> : 

\r>>>l l \ 

-> • ^ > ,'-}P 3 >: 

■ ?: ‘ i > 

? >••’> y> 

V&fcSL > ■ 


4' ) y 

/4&j>y>< 

,?> ; '0 
--> 

S> f> 

*p£>:t 

’ "■ > > • 

’ J '0>5> — 

g> ^ 

x >J 2 > -5 

•' > > > - 

) -S 
> ^ 
2 ^ 


> 2 
»i>- 
• > >• 
>• > 
)') 
> J* 

> a 

>iS> 

>)£ 

>)1> 

>:V> 

■->’>> 


•-^aa 

~31^> 




■» ,3 

■ >V’\ 

■ 1 :#,? 

’ £ > 

f-Sim 

v :,“4^2Dl 


M i ii { 

X' > i> . 


■g? > > - 

// >>/^ 

3° » > ^ 


v| 

a 

> > - 

>i 3Fy 


> j I 

S>^> 

S 3 

>J> ^ 


9 ^ 

»> ^ 

i T> '-^=f 


U^UMuVxAJut /V 





LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 


0 029 806 111 9 






